2002 (1) TMI 586

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ndent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. This appeal has been directed by the appellants against the impugned order dated 18-4-2001 vide which the Commissioner as adjudicating authority has disallowed their abatement claim for the disputed periods. 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of non-alloy steel ingots/billets. They filed abatement claims under sub-section (3) o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ngly not accepted the same without sufficient cause by observing that there was no presumption about the receipt of the intimation sent under postal certificate, by the jurisdictional Superintendent. The learned counsel has referred to the photo copies of the postal receipts placed on record showing the despatch of the letters by them on all the occasions when the unit of the appellants remained c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... stt. Commissioner about the closure of the unit on all the occasions as required under Rule 96ZO(2) of the Rules. An intimation was also sent by them to the Superintendent of Central Excise and their exists no cogent reason to doubt their version that the said intimation was sent under postal certificate. They have also placed on record the copies of the postal certificates dated 23-11-1998, 30-12 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e intimation to the Superintendent. There is nothing on the record to suggest that the address mentioned on the postal certificates of the Superintendent was wrong/incorrect. There is also no material on the record to suggest that the letter sent by the appellants was received back as undelivered. Therefore, initial presumption deserves to be drawn is that the letters must have been received by th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ly from 27-11-1998 and not from 23-11-1998, as even conceded by the learned Counsel before us during the course of arguments. But, for the other two periods i.e. 16-10-1998 to 26-10-1998 and 4-1-1999 to 17-2-1999, the abatement claim of the appellants deserves to be allowed in toto. Therefore, we accordingly allow the abatement claims of the appellants. 8. In view of the discussion made above, t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X