AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (5) TMI 81
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pecifications of their customer, viz., M/s. Ranjita Enterprises and cleared the same to the said customers on payment of Central Excise duty of Rs. 90,619.13 under invoice dated 21-3-1997. M/s. Ranjita Enterprises who had ordered for supply of the said goods for the purpose of certain project, informed the appellants by letter dated 14-7-1997 that on account of cancellation of project, they were r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oning etc. envisaged under Rule 173-L but, in fact, had been returned by their customers on account of cancellation of the project. According to the Assistant Commissioner, the goods so returned did not fall within the ambit of Rule 173-L and therefore, the appellants were not entitled to refund of the duty originally paid on the goods. The appeal filed by the party against the Assistant Commissio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....same to such customer on payment of appropriate duty. This fact is also not disputed. It is also not disputed that the subsequent clearance of the reconditioned goods to the new customer was done by the appellants under D.3 intimation to the proper Central Excise authority in accordance with the provisions of Rule 173-L. The only ground stated by the lower authorities for rejecting the appellants ....