TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 807X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order]. - The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the Appellants filed a rebate claim of Rs. 60,02,231/- on CIF value of goods. Subsequently, they revised the claim and restricted to Rs. 59,48,580/- on FOB value. The Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise sanctioned the rebate claim. The Appellant filed a refund claim of Rs. 53,651/- on 29th September, 2005 for the differential am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Appellant is treating it as rebate of duty, the same should be included in their rebate claim application. So, it is refund of duty and not rebate claim and, therefore, the submission of the ld. DR has no merit. 4. In any event, I find that the Appellant has not claimed the rebate of duty of Rs. 53,651/- and there is no scope for challenging the rebate order. The findings of both the authoriti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
