https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114528 Rule 173L permitted refund where duty-paid goods were returned to the factory after rejection, then unpacked, inspected, straightened, cleaned and repacked before being cleared again. The provision, read with Rule 173H, was designed to allow remaking or reconditioning without repeated levy on the same goods, so the earlier duty could not be retained when the goods had already borne duty on original removal and again on re-clearance. Denial of refund on the ground that the goods were cleared for captive consumption was not justified, because an assessee could either claim exemption or pay duty on captive consumption. Refund was therefore admissible and double taxation was avoided. en-us Fri, 08 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 May 2012 13:48:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114528 Rule 173L permitted refund where duty-paid goods were returned to the factory after rejection, then unpacked, inspected, straightened, cleaned and repacked before being cleared again. The provision, read with Rule 173H, was designed to allow remaking or reconditioning without repeated levy on the same goods, so the earlier duty could not be retained when the goods had already borne duty on original removal and again on re-clearance. Denial of refund on the ground that the goods were cleared for captive consumption was not justified, because an assessee could either claim exemption or pay duty on captive consumption. Refund was therefore admissible and double taxation was avoided. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 08 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114528