1999 (4) TMI 217

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order per : P.C. Jain, Vice President]. Relevant facts of this case are as follows :- 1.1 The appellants herein are manufacturers of ACSR Weasel Conductor. On the order of two customers, namely M/s. Mohan Aluminium P. Ltd. and M/s. Mysore Conductors P. Ltd. - both belonging to Bangalore - the appellants supplied the aforesaid conductors to UPSEB but they made the invoices to the afore .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nformation and consequently two refunds are not admissible to the appellants. On this basis, the refund claims were rejected. On appeals before lower appellate authority they did not succeed. The lower appellate authority adopted the arguments of the original adjudicating authority. Hence these appeals before us. 2. Learned Advocate, Shri K.K. Anand for the appellants urges that the appellants m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ngs of the lower authorities, as already set out above. 4. We have carefully considered the pleas advanced from both sides. We agree with the submission of the learned Advocate for the appellants that merely because the invoices have been made in the name of the parties at Bangalore and the goods have been sent to UPSEB directly on the direction of the customers - two parties at Bangalore, it ca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X