https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51675 Refund under Rule 173L could not be denied for mere non-maintenance of the prescribed detailed account where material issue slips and production slips substantially evidenced receipt, remelting and remanufacture of the returned goods. The account-keeping requirement was treated as procedural and satisfied in substance. Refund was, however, confined to goods remade into the same class as the returned goods: sockets remade and cleared on duty qualified, but brake shoes and sole plates did not, as they were different goods. The claim was therefore sustained only to the extent of sockets remade and re-cleared, and rejected for the remaining goods. en-us Mon, 30 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Sep 2010 15:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51675 Refund under Rule 173L could not be denied for mere non-maintenance of the prescribed detailed account where material issue slips and production slips substantially evidenced receipt, remelting and remanufacture of the returned goods. The account-keeping requirement was treated as procedural and satisfied in substance. Refund was, however, confined to goods remade into the same class as the returned goods: sockets remade and cleared on duty qualified, but brake shoes and sole plates did not, as they were different goods. The claim was therefore sustained only to the extent of sockets remade and re-cleared, and rejected for the remaining goods. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 30 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51675