1978 (6) TMI 57

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lication and has also examined the records of the case. 2. It is observed that the petitioners filed a refund claim of excise duty paid on iron or steel products falling under Item 26AA (ia) of Central Excise Tariff, manufactured out of cut and broken ingots as the products are not liable to duty in terms of Notification No. 206/63, dated 30-11-1963. The refund claim was submitted in pursuance o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the total refund claim, the amount of duty, which was paid within one year from the date of filing the refund claim, was indicated before the Appellate Collector. The Appellate Collector ordered that as the necessary evidence is available with the party the Assistant Collector should examine the refund claim denovo and he set aside the order-in-original without going into the merits of the case. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he petitioners have therefore urged that the entire refund claim should be remanded to the Assistant Collector and not merely the portion which was not time-barred. 5. Government of India observe that all the pleas advanced by the party were not properly considered at the lower level, the Appellate Collector did not want to pass any order on merit but chose to remand the case to the Assistant Co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X