2006 (8) TMI 425

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... S.L. Meena, DR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the refund claim of the appellant under Rule 173L of Central Excise Rules was rejected on the ground that the appellant had not complied with the condition of the Rule. 3. The contention of the appellant ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....letion of process within the stipulated period. It is also alleged in the show-cause notice that the same goods were not cleared, as the description of goods in the invoices are different. The contention is that the process of retesting and realignment was completed on 14-6-01, which is within the six months from the date of receipt of the goods. The appellant also filed D-3 intimation on receipt ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ding receipt of the duty paid goods and as per their record the necessary retesting and realignment was completed on 14-6-01 and the same goods were cleared on payment of duty on second time, therefore, the rejection of refund claim is not sustainable. 4. The Revenue relied upon the finding of the lower authority to submit that the appellant had not fully complied with the conditions of Ru....