9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (7) TMI 360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al capacity of production of the appellants at 1040.766 MTs w.e.f. 27-11-1997 was set aside and the Commissioner was directed to take de novo decision in the matter after hearing the party. The adjudicating authority, accordingly, passed order dated 11-2-2000 after hearing the party. It is this order, which is presently under challenge. 2. Carefully examined the impugned order and connected records. Heard both sides. Reiterating the grounds of the present appeal, ld. Advocate Shri K.K. Anand for the appellants has formulated three issues as having arisen in the present appeal, and they are as follows : (i) The appellants who were engaged in the manufacture of hot re-rolled products came under the compounded levy scheme under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entral Excise in the de novo proceedings. They have done likewise in the present memorandum of appeal as well. On the first issue aforesaid, the appellants have placed strong reliance on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Balaji Steel Rolling Mills (P) Ltd. v. CCE, Hyderabad [2000 (124) E.L.T. 363 (T) = 1999 (32) RLT 743], in which the Tribunal considered the distinction between 'batch' type and 'pusher' type furnaces and, accepting the technical opinion rendered by the National Institute of Secondary Steel Technology, held that a 'pusher' type furnace shall have two distinct characteristics and observed that there was no reason to dispute such characteristics as being characteristic of a 'pusher' type furnace as that was the opin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tegory in which the furnace of another manufacturer would fall. The adjudicating authority ought to have taken cognisance of the contentious nature of the issue and afforded an opportunity to the party to take appropriate steps to prove their claim that their furnace belonged to batch type. Such a course of action on the part of the adjudicating authority ought to have served the ends of justice. I am, therefore, inclined to accept ld. Counsel s prayer for an opportunity to prove the appellants claim regarding the type of their furnace which is very decisive vis-a-vis duty liability. 5. I find from the records of the case that there is no effective denial of the appellants' consistent plea that their mill remained closed from 1-9-1997 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner determined 27-11-1997 as the date from which the changed value of parameter d became effective and determined the ACP accordingly at 849.945 MTs. The appellants case is that the ACP could not have been determined at 1040.766 MTs by way of adoption of the actual production capacity for 1996-97 and ought to have been limited to 849.945 MTs, even assuming that the furnace was of pusher type. If the furnace is held to be of the batch type, the ACP would stand at half this value according to the formula applicable to that type of furnace. Ld. Counsel has drawn support, in this connection, from the Tribunal's order in Awadh Alloys (P) Ltd. (supra). 7. Ld. DR has reiterated the observations and findings of the lower authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
