9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 90X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri H.M. Dixit, Asstt. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : M.V. Ravindran, Member (J)]. - This appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. P/673/96, dated 5-11-1996. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue that falls for consideration in this appeal is whether appellant is entitled for refund of the duty paid on the goods i.e. scooter clea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ities have erred in coming to a conclusion for rejecting the refund claim. It is his submission that when the goods are exported no duty has to be levied hence duty paid by them initially should be refunded to them. For which preposition, he relies upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd. - 1995 (78) E.L.T. 595 (Tri.). It is his further submission that the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laim has to be held as hit by limitation. We find that the first appellate authority was correct in coming to a conclusion that payment of duty would mean that the appellant should have followed the provisions of Rule 173L of erstwhile Central Excise Rules in order to claim the refund of duty paid as in that case only the goods can be considered as removed on payment of duty. We do not find any me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
