9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (1) TMI 186X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al filed by the appellants against the decision of the Collector of Central Excise Customs (Appeals), Pune where by the impugned order he had confirmed the order of the Assistant Collector rejecting the refund claim. 2. The appellants in this case are manufacturers of heating elements falling under Chapter Heading 8516.00 and clearing the same on payment of appropriate duty. A quantity of 31 n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at it was hit under provisions of sub-rule (3) of Rule 173L as the refund application has been filed beyond six months from the return of the goods. Against which the appeal was filed where the Collector (Appeals) rejected the appeal on the ground that the provisions do not require and the processing of the returned goods can be undertaken only after the goods can be verified by the Department. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is verified and inspected by the jurisdictional Inspector. Because the inspection took place on 25-4-1990 and thereafter they have reprocessed the goods and cleared the same against payment of duty. They therefore feel that in terms of provisions of 173L they entitled for the refund. 4. I have gone through the grounds of appeal. In the absence of the appeal I have to look into the case on me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or extension of period as per Rule 173L(4) and on their failing to do so, they cannot be granted refund. The case law cited by them is of no help as in the present case there is no ambiguity in the provisions and the intention is amply clear i.e. the account should be rendered to the satisfaction of the Collector within six months unless this condition is relaxed by the Principal Collector for rea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
