https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116760 Refund under Rule 173L could not be denied for a technical lapse in maintaining Form V and allied records where duty-paid returned goods were shown to have been received back, reprocessed in manufacture, and the resulting goods cleared on payment of duty. The substantive requirement of reprocessing was satisfied, so the alleged record deficiency did not defeat the claim. A refund rejection based on unjust enrichment was also unsustainable because that ground was not included in the show cause notice; an adverse finding cannot rest on a basis not put to notice. The refund rejection was therefore set aside, with consequential relief. en-us Mon, 21 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Jun 2012 14:28:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116760 Refund under Rule 173L could not be denied for a technical lapse in maintaining Form V and allied records where duty-paid returned goods were shown to have been received back, reprocessed in manufacture, and the resulting goods cleared on payment of duty. The substantive requirement of reprocessing was satisfied, so the alleged record deficiency did not defeat the claim. A refund rejection based on unjust enrichment was also unsustainable because that ground was not included in the show cause notice; an adverse finding cannot rest on a basis not put to notice. The refund rejection was therefore set aside, with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 21 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116760