2018 (10) TMI 2031

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Respondent. ORDER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein a refund claim has been rejected by the lower authority. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicle parts on behalf of M/s. Hero Honda Motors Ltd. As per purchase order dated 30-11-2006, the appellant has supplied the goods to M/s. Hero Honda Motors Ltd. on the p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 4. On the other hand, Ld. AR has relied on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Keihin Fie Pvt. Ltd. - 2010 (259) E.L.T. 742 (Tri.-Mum.) and decision of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Mauria Udyog Ltd. - 2007 (207) E.L.T. 31 (P & H) to say that in the absence of price reduction on the basis of provisional [assessment], the appellant is not entitled to claim refund. 5 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X