It has been brought to the notice of the Board that there exists some doubt in the field formations with regard to powers of entertaining refund applications in cases where refund has to be granted under provisions of Rule 97 and Rule 173 (L) read with Section 11B wherein the goods originally manufactured and cleared for home consumption on payment of duty are returned to another factory, related or not to the original factory, for repair, reprocessing, reconditioning, or subjected to any other similar process.

2.     The issue has been examined by the Board. It is clarified that provisions laid down in Rule 97 and Rule 173 (L) clearly stipulate that necessary scrutiny of documents and physical identifications of the defective goods shall have to be carried out by the officers having jurisdiction over the factory receiving the goods. Therefore, in all such cases refund of duty already paid shall also be dealt with by the Assistant Commissioner having jurisdiction over the factory, which received the goods. However, while processing such refund claims, information/ papers relevant to the issues may be obtained from the Assistant Commissioner having jurisdiction over the original manufacturers. Also, the refund applications should be disposed off under intimation to the Assistant Commissioner in charge of the original manufacturing unit.