2004 (2) TMI 583

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ]. - The appeal of the appellant is directed against the rejection of refund claim by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellants made a claim for refund of duty of Rs. 52,900/- before the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise. Against the rejection of the claim, the appeal was filed before the Commissioner (Appeals). The same was rejected and hence the present appeal to the Tribunal. 2.&emsp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ocessed goods on payment of duty, they cannot come forward and claim refund under a rule, provisions of which have not been followed by the assessee. 3. The Commissioner (Appeals) has also adopted the same reasoning to reject the claim. In this connection, I note that, separate account of duty paid goods received for re-processing and repairs, i.e. required to be maintained by the manufactur .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o other infirmity in record keeping, so far as the admissibility of the claim under Rule 173L is concerned. 7. Consequently, I hold that there has been a compliance of provision of Rule 173L and rejection of the claim was without any authority. Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same is allowed with consequential relief, if any, in accordance with the law.
Case laws, Decisions, Jud .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X