2001 (12) TMI 103

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hree appeals arise out of the same impugned order they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the respondents herein filed refund claims under Rule 173L on the ground that they had supplied capsules to customers; that the customers rejected the goods being of sub-standard in quality and returned the same; that the res....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....entity of the goods at this stage. He submitted that the goods were remade and after remaking they were cleared on payment of duty. He submits that since duty was paid twice, therefore, the respondents filed claim for refund as the law does not require that duty should be paid twice on the same goods. He submitted that the main objection of the Department was that duty paying documents were not fu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nsignee, there is no warrant to thrust Modvat benefit on them. The learned Consultant of the respondents has shown a copy of Bomaby-I Collectorate Trade Notice No. 89/89, dated 3-11-89 wherein the Department allows removal of such defective inputs on payment of duty under Rule 57F(1)(ii) and such goods after reprocessing can be cleared on payment of duty under Rule 173L. Hence we find no merit in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... squarely covered by the provisions of Rule 173L. For purpose of Rule 173L there was relevance of D-3 intimation and payment of duty at the final stage when remade goods were cleared. There was no dispute on these two aspects. I further note that similar issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of Supreme Industries cited above and the Tribunal in that case held that refund was admissible to....