https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124611 The appellants, engaged in sugar manufacturing, sought a refund for excess payment of supervision charges for storing non-duty paid goods outside the godown due to space constraints. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the refund claim, requiring payment on a cost recovery basis for the entire storage duration. The Tribunal held that the appeal against supervision charges was not maintainable, following a Rajasthan High Court decision, and advised the appellants to seek redress from the Commissioner or Administrative authority. The Tribunal emphasized the need for charges linked to actual supervision during goods clearance, not the entire storage period. en-us Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Sep 2017 11:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124611 The appellants, engaged in sugar manufacturing, sought a refund for excess payment of supervision charges for storing non-duty paid goods outside the godown due to space constraints. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the refund claim, requiring payment on a cost recovery basis for the entire storage duration. The Tribunal held that the appeal against supervision charges was not maintainable, following a Rajasthan High Court decision, and advised the appellants to seek redress from the Commissioner or Administrative authority. The Tribunal emphasized the need for charges linked to actual supervision during goods clearance, not the entire storage period. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 17 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124611