2007 (12) TMI 397 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Permission for renovation of stenter machines under Compounded Levy Scheme.
2. Discrepancy in the renovation work completion of stenter machines.
3. Typographical error in the letter leading to demand raised by Revenue.
4. Appeal against the demand raised for the month of April, 2000.

Analysis:
1. The appellant sought permission from the Commissioner to convert stenter machines from oil base heating to gas chambers. The permission was granted, and the renovation work commenced on one stenter machine as per the approved plan.

2. The Revenue objected to the completion of work on only one stenter machine based on a letter from the appellant. The appellant argued that the reference to one stenter machine in the letter was a typographical error and should not be the sole basis for concluding that the second stenter was not renovated. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant's argument, emphasizing that the sealing of the stenter machine showed that it was converted into 3 chambers as intended.

3. The Tribunal noted that the sealing of the stenter machine within a month of the renovation work further supported the appellant's claim of conversion. The typographical error in the letter should not have been used as the sole basis for the Revenue's conclusion against the appellant. The Tribunal emphasized that without further investigation, relying solely on a typographical mistake was unjustifiable.

4. Based on the observations and analysis, the Tribunal found no justifiable reason to uphold the demand for the month of April 2000. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues surrounding the permission for renovation, discrepancy in the completion of work, the typographical error leading to the demand, and the final decision of the Tribunal to set aside the demand for the month of April 2000.