9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 400X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (S) [2006 (195) E.L.T. 275 (Tribunal)]. 2. By impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal and in consequence, set aside the order of Commissioner of Appeals impugned in the said appeal. 3. So the short-question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether Tribunal was justified in allowing assessee's appeal thereby justified in setting aside of the order passed by the Commissioner of Appeals? 4. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on following substantial questions of law :- "a. Whether the learned CESTAT was correct in setting aside the order of Commissioner (Appeals) and allowing the appeal of the party with consequential relief, ignoring the statutory provisions of Rule 173L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on its receipt from such parties to enable them to claim the refund of the duty paid by them on such returned goods. It was however, rejected by the adjudicating authority and by the Commissioner of Appeals but was allowed by the Tribunal by impugned order when the Tribunal proceeded to allow the assessee's appeal and allowed their refund claim which they had made before the adjudicating authority. It is against this order of the Tribunal the Revenue (Commissioner of Central Excise) has filed this appeal. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we find no merit in this appeal and hence it merits dismissal. 9. In our considered opinion what persuaded the Tribunal to allow the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd of the duty paid by them on the finished goods sold and which were returned to them due to certain reasons by the respective purchasers and which they actually used in manufacturing process again. 12. After all when the facts are established with adequate evidence and authorities are otherwise satisfied with the substantial compliances made by the assessee then Rules of procedure cannot be used against the assessee to deny them the benefit of Rules. 13. In this appeal also, the learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) was not able to successfully assail this material factual finding recorded by the Tribunal. His only submission was that there was contravention of Rule 173L and hence claim should have been dismissed. We do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
