9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (3) TMI 268X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollows :- 1.1 The appellants herein cleared certain goods viz. (1) super enamel aluminium wire; and (2) insulated aluminium rectangular conductor on 9-11-1993 to Manipur Electric Works Pvt. Ltd., Gaya. It, however, so happened that the consignee of the goods at Gaya did not take delivery of the goods because he could not arrange payment of the same. The goods, therefore, remained in the transpor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t been returned by the consignee for repair/reprocessing or reconditioning. It is appropriate to reproduce the reasons given by the adjudicating authority for rejecting the refund claim of the appellants :- ... Following the procedure under Rule 173L by them is of no use since the basic condition is not fulfilled and the goods are not returned by the consignee for repairs/reprocessing or recond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... actory for reconditioning and then clearing on payment of duty. The reason given by the lower authorities for rejecting the refund claim is not correct. He has drawn attention to an earlier Order-in-Original by the same Assistant Collector under Order No. 6/Refund/92, dated 11-11-1992 wherein the refund claim was admitted on the ground that the goods had deteriorated during storage and brought bac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und for rejecting the refund claim in this case in view of clear scope of Rule 173L. 4.1 I have considered the submissions advanced by both sides. Reading of Rule 173L does not bring the intention of the lower authorities which they have placed on that rule. Rule 173L is in the following terms :- Rule 173L. Refund of duty on goods returned to factory. - (1) The Collector may grant refund of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
