2004 (8) TMI 559

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... filed against the order of the lower appellate authority rejecting the refund claim of the appellant under Rule 173L of Central Excise Rules. 2. Briefly, the facts are that the appellant cleared his final product under different consignments after paying duty leviable thereon. A part of the quantity of those goods were rejected by the buyers and such rejected goods were brought back to the facto .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the contention of the department is correct, then, when the goods are cleared for the second time no duty is payable on them because the department itself says that the goods have not undergone the processes of manufacture. Further, the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Indore v. Pratibha Syntex Ltd. reported in 2002 (149) E.L.T. 548 (Tri.-Del.) held that non-adherence to the procedure under Rule 173L .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X