Judgment M.M.Kumar, J. 1. This appeal filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for brevity the Act) is directed against order dated 3-6-2008 [2008 (232) E.L.T. 641 (Tri. - Del.)] (Annexure A.3) passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for brevity the Tribunal) holding that assessee was entitled to avail the refund of the credit and, therefore, the provisions of Rule 16 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11A of the Act would not be attracted. 2. It has come on record that the assessee, on 27-11-2004, has credited its account by availing the refund. On the objection raised by audit, respondent debited its amount on 26-9-2005. However, the Assistant Commissioner allowed the refund of Rs. 2,94,085/- in their RG-23A Part-II Account. 3. On the aforesaid factual basis, it cannot be concluded that there was any fraud, mis-statement, collusion, suppression of facts or violation of any provisions. The refund was, in fact, permissible and the only procedural lapse was committed by the dealer-respondent. Even otherwise, the view taken by the Tribunal is based on finding of fact and we cannot, in an appeal under Section 35(G) of the Act, re-appreciate the evidence and conclude that the finding of fact is incorrect so the appeal can only be maintained on the substantial question of law. 4. There is no merit in the appeal. Dismissed.