1996 (10) TMI 322

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is filed by the department against the Order-in-Appeal No. 439/CE/CHD/92, dated 20-5-1992 whereby the refund of Rs. 30,281.49 under Section 173L was rejected. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in manufacture of Bulk drugs falling under Chapters 28-29 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellants cleared 310 Kg. of ampicillin trihydrate on payment of appropri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he refund claim of the appellant. Shri Lalit Arora, representative appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that they fulfilled all the conditions as provided in Rule 173L of Central Excise Rules, 1944. He submitted that the refund was rejected on the ground that no reason for rejection of goods was mentioned. He submitted that the Rule 173L of Central Excise Rules does provide to give the r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... plained to the department. Section 173L of Central Excise Rules does not provide to explain the reasons for rejection of goods. Regarding process undertaken by the appellant, the applicants vide Annexure 8 informed the Superintendent, Central Excise that there was alleged to have colour problem which is rectified by the process of blending. This information was given to the department on their que .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X