2000 (7) TMI 497

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the Appellants. Shri R.K. Sharma, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. -  The appellants herein filed a refund claim for Rs. 42,07,977/- in respect of Central Excise duty paid during the period from 19-2-1996 to 29-6-1996 in respect of cold rolled steel strips made from hot rolled strips on the ground that as per the judgment in their own case re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....osing rejection of the refund claim on both the grounds. The Assistant Commissioner relied upon an earlier order of the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Patiala and rejected the refund claim; the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the stand that the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of same assessee cited supra was not relevant in the context of the Tariff as it stood subsequent to 1-3-1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ter heading namely Heading 73.11 is not sufficient to conclude that the process of cold rolling from hot rolled strips amounts to manufacture. The burden cast upon the Revenue to show that manufacture has taken place has not been discharged. Hence we hold that the refund claim is admissible on merits; however, the appellants will have to satisfy the Assistant Commissioner to whom the matter is rem....