1 CEXA55.04.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION KJ CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.55 OF 2004 Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III )..Appellant Vs. M/s.Crompton Greaves Ltd., )..Respondents ---- Mr. A.S.Rao @ Mr.S.D.Bhosale for the appellant. Mr. Aditya Chitale for the respondents. ---- CORAM : J. P .DEVADHAR & MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ DATE : 12/1/2011. PC 1 This Appeal was admitted on 8.12.2005 on the following questions of law :- a. Whether CESTAT was correct in law in allowing the appeal of the respondent on the basis of the judgment in the matter of the CCE, Bangalore Vs. Gayathri Workmen Welfare Association 1986 (26) ELT 397 ? b Whether the respondent is entitled to the refund of 2 CEXA55.04.sxw duty under Rule 173L in respect of the goods which were brought back to the factory after the period of 2 and half years from the date of clearance ? C Whether the period of 2 years provided in Rule 173L(I)i) is a maximum period for claiming the benefit of refund of duty or whether the said period can be relaxed beyond two years by the Commissioner exercising the power under sub rule 4 of Rule 173L ? 2 In the present case, the goods which were initially cleared on payment of duty on 30.3.1996 were received back under Rule 173(L) of the Central Excise Rules after obtaining the requisite permission for relaxing the period. The Tribunal following its decision in the case of CCE, Banglore Vs. Gayathri Women Welfare Association reported in 1986(26) E.L.T 397 held that the Commissioner has the power to relax the period under Rule 173(L) of the Central Excise Rules 1944. In fact, Sub rule 4 of Rule 173(L) specifically empowers the Commissioner to relax the provisions for the purpose of admitting the claim of refund. 3 Learned Counsel for the Revenue fairly states that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Gayathri Women Welfare (supra) has been accepted by the Revenue. In these 3 CEXA55.04.sxw circumstances, no fault can be found with the order of the Tribunal. Accordingly, we hold that under Rule 173L of the Central Excise Rules, the proper officer is empowered to relax the period for return of goods beyond two years and in the facts of the present case, the decision of the Tribunal in allowing the claim of the assessee cannot be faulted. Appeal is disposed off accordingly with no order as to costs. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J) (J.P.DEVADHAR,J)