9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (5) TMI 164X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder]. This is an appeal against the Order-in-Appeal No. M-596/TH-40/84, dated 20-6-1984 setting aside the Order-in-Original No. V (14E) 18.227/79/15647, dated 6-10-1979. 2. The appellants cleared certain goods under the gate passes dated 22-6-1977. Because of some constraints the goods could not be removed and the Customers were not prepared to receive and hence the goods were retained in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was to be refunded. Even the gate passes were also submitted alongwith the D 3 declaration. He therefore came to the conclusion that the refund claim filed should not be rejected as time barred and allowed the refund claim. 3. Mrs. Bharati Chavan, the ld. JDR appearing for the appellant submits that going by the application for refund there is a clear mention that the refund was claimed for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urns were made. It is only the formal application that has come at a later stage, when the double duty payment has been made and when the claim appears to have been made even in [RT 12] returns at an appropriate time within the period prescribed under Section [11B] of the Central Excise Act, the claim taken on the application at a later date should not come in the way of granting the refund which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
