9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1263X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refund claim as claimed by the appellant was not required to be rejected before reassessment of the Bill of Entry as sought by the appellant. Therefore, the matter remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority to decide the reassessment of Bill of Entry. - Matter remanded back - Appeal No. C/4060/2012-CU(SM) - - - Dated:- 19-1-2015 - Ashok Jindal, Member (J) For the Appellant : Shri Priyanka ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on'ble Apex Court in the case of Priya Blue Industries Ltd. Vs. C.C. (Preventive) - 2004 (172) E.L.T. 145 (SC) and in the case of C.C.E. Kanpur Vs. Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd.-2000 (120) E.L.T. 285 (SC). Therefore, appellant is not entitled to take refund claim. 2. It is the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the appellant that the Bill of Entry was assessed on 22.02.2011 and immediately thereaf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he final product manufactured by the appellant. Therefore, they are not entitled to take refund as they have not borne the duty by themselves. In these circumstances, appellant is not entitled to take refund. He further submits that facts of the case on which appellant has relied are not relevant with the facts of this case, as in that case the exemption was given unconditionally whereas in this c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
