2005 (11) TMI 313

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e full machine was Rs. 2,52,138/-. Two major components of the machine, viz. 'knitting head assembly' and 'take down drive assembly' both falling under SH 8448.90, were returned by the buyer on 19-5-99 and receipt thereof was intimated to the department by the appellants (D3 - Intimation) in terms of Rule 173L of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. It is claimed by the appellants that the Central Excise Range officer, upon receipt of such intimation, visited their factory and made the requisite verification. Prior to receipt of the above components from the buyer, the appellants had, on 26-4-99, supplied to the Noida party one unit of 'knitting head assembly' and one unit of 'take down drive assembly' as replacement under cover of invoice evide....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8.90 but what was cleared to them subsequently was a knitting machine falling under SH 8447.00 and therefore the requirement under Rule 173L for claiming refund of the duty paid original on the components did not get satisfied in this case. In this connection, she has also claimed support from the above decision of the Tribunal in Indian Dyestuff Industries Ltd. (supra). Reliance has also been placed on the Tribunal's decision in Dekka Chem Ltd v. CCE - 2001 (130) E.L.T. 935 (Tri. Mumbai), wherein, while dealing with a refund claim under Rule 173L, the Division Bench of the Tribunal held that drug and drug intermediate, falling under different Tariff headings were not of the same class. Ld. Consultant has also relied on the Tribunal's decis....