https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123980 Refund of duty originally paid on goods cleared by the same manufacturer was held admissible where the goods were later returned under Rule 173L for reconditioning and then exported without payment of duty. The Tribunal distinguished Sabari Starch on facts, noting that it involved duty paid by a different person and a different refund context. Following its earlier view and later Tribunal decisions, the ruling treated Rule 173L(1) as permitting refund in this factual matrix when the returned goods were reprocessed and exported. The Revenue's objection was rejected on the basis of the distinct factual setting. en-us Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Sep 2012 12:02:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123980 Refund of duty originally paid on goods cleared by the same manufacturer was held admissible where the goods were later returned under Rule 173L for reconditioning and then exported without payment of duty. The Tribunal distinguished Sabari Starch on facts, noting that it involved duty paid by a different person and a different refund context. Following its earlier view and later Tribunal decisions, the ruling treated Rule 173L(1) as permitting refund in this factual matrix when the returned goods were reprocessed and exported. The Revenue's objection was rejected on the basis of the distinct factual setting. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 16 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123980