9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (7) TMI 222X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent. [Order]. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Collector (Appeals) bearing No. M-498/BD-291/96, dated 26-11-1986 rejecting the appellants appeal. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellants being the manufacturers of medicaments, removed on payment of duty certain medicines (76,800 bottles) in January-February 1983. They were found to have been crystall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds have not been reprocessed separately. When the matter was taken in appeal, the Collector (Appeals) rejected the claim on the ground that the appellants did not maintain account for duty paid returned goods in terms of Rule 173L(2). The present appeal is against the aforesaid order. 3. Shri Parakh, the Ld. advocate on behalf of the appellants, pleaded that there is no stipulation under Rule 17 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the register with proper co-relation to the finished product, proper account has been rendered. 4. Mrs. Lipika M. Roy Choudhury, the Ld. SDR on the other hand contended that once the goods are mixed up with the other non duty paid goods, the accountal of the returned goods for reprocessing is not possible. She, therefore, pleaded that in the absence of proper accountal of the goods returned for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... escribed under the Rule. What is contemplated in the Rule is that the goods should be returned under proper intimation and should be accounted for in the prescribed record. On a perusal of the record, it is found that this has been complied with and the issue for repocessing is also noted and the number of bottles obtained by way of reprocessing is also mentioned. In the circumstances, I am of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
