TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (8) TMI 843
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....DER The respondent manufactured transformer chargeable to Central Excise duty. Beside this they also carried out repairs of the transformers. The appellant had supplied transformers to the MP State Electricity Board against a contract during the period from September, 2003 to December, 2003 at a particular price and the duty was paid accordingly. The respondent subsequently filed a refund claim c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to Electricity Board has been made against the contract with price variation clause, that the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Mauria Udyog Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2007 (207) E.L.T. 31 (P&H) has held that when clearances of the goods were not based on provisional basis, the reduction of price at a later date could not be made foundation for seeking refund under Section 11B, that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....upra) is not applicable to the facts of this case, that when the appellant have paid duty at a price which is higher than the actual price of the goods at the time of clearance, the refund would be admissible to them and, as such, there is no infirmity in the impugned order. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. 5. In this case there is no dispute about the fact that though the supplies t....