Differential refund under area-based exemption rejected where recalculated duty on value addition exceeded the refund already granted.

Re-computation of a differential refund under an area-based exemption was examined by comparing duty liability on Chapter 26 goods, payments made through PLA and CENVAT credit, and duty payable on the prescribed value addition. The Commissioner (Appeals) had supported re-determination with detailed calculations showing that the refund already sanctioned was lower than the duty payable on value addition, and that the earlier computation required correction. As that reasoning was not rebutted, the claim for any further refund was rejected and no interference with the re-determination was warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to re-computation of the differential refund in respect of Chapter 26 goods under the area based exemption notification.

Analysis: The refund claim was examined on the basis of the duty liability on Chapter 26 goods, the amounts paid through PLA and CENVAT credit, and the duty payable on the prescribed value addition. The Commissioner (Appeals) had recorded detailed calculations showing that the refund already sanctioned was less than the duty payable on value addition and that the earlier computation required re-determination. That reasoning was not rebutted by the appellant.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to interference with the re-determination made by the Commissioner (Appeals), and the claim for further refund was rejected.

---