https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95928 Refund of duty on chassis cleared for defence use was admissible once the requisite certificate under Notification No. 263/87 was produced by the competent authority, and the fact that the certificate referred to the chassis did not defeat the claim where the goods were sent back for engine replacement. However, refund under Rule 173L was confined to the duty actually paid on the goods after re-making or re-conditioning, so the claim could not exceed that amount. The claim was also within the limitation period under Section 11B, and refund was therefore available only to the extent of duty paid on the engine at the final clearance after re-conditioning. en-us Tue, 06 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Dec 2011 10:40:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95928 Refund of duty on chassis cleared for defence use was admissible once the requisite certificate under Notification No. 263/87 was produced by the competent authority, and the fact that the certificate referred to the chassis did not defeat the claim where the goods were sent back for engine replacement. However, refund under Rule 173L was confined to the duty actually paid on the goods after re-making or re-conditioning, so the claim could not exceed that amount. The claim was also within the limitation period under Section 11B, and refund was therefore available only to the extent of duty paid on the engine at the final clearance after re-conditioning. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 06 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95928