2004 (7) TMI 429

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2. The appellants have filed the present application for recall of the Final Order dated 24-6-2003 vide which their appeal was dismissed as not contested on account of their non-appearance. But in the application, they have alleged that they intimated to the registry that they wanted decision on merits and did not wish to be heard in person. As this request of the party was never put up before .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that they have received goods under Rule 173H and in terms of Chapter Note 6 of Chapter 34 of the Tariff, they paid duty later on, under Rule 173L. But their refund claim, in my view, has been rightly rejected. The goods were received by the appellants under Rule 173H and after repacking the same, they redespatched the same without payment of duty under Rule 173H of the Rules. They filed D-3 intim .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X