https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252991 The appellant's refund claim for duty paid on wrongly classified goods was initially rejected due to lack of evidence on assessable value. The appellate authority emphasized correct classification for duty calculation and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, considering potential eligibility for refund. The requirement of a certificate from the Range Superintendent regarding non-availment of Cenvat credit was crucial, with the appellant failing to provide it initially. Despite potential eligibility, the tribunal instructed the appellant to produce the necessary certificate before finalizing the refund claim. en-us Tue, 26 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Nov 2014 17:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252991 The appellant's refund claim for duty paid on wrongly classified goods was initially rejected due to lack of evidence on assessable value. The appellate authority emphasized correct classification for duty calculation and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, considering potential eligibility for refund. The requirement of a certificate from the Range Superintendent regarding non-availment of Cenvat credit was crucial, with the appellant failing to provide it initially. Despite potential eligibility, the tribunal instructed the appellant to produce the necessary certificate before finalizing the refund claim. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 26 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252991