9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 1067X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the Compounded Levy Scheme of Rule 96ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 during the material period. Sub-section 3 of Section 3A provided for abatement of duty for any continuous period of not less than 7 days of closure of factory subject to such conditions as might be prescribed. The conditions were prescribed under sub-rule 2 of Rule 96ZO. One of the conditions was that the manufacturer shall inform in writing about the closure to the departmental authorities on or prior to the date of closure. He shall also intimate the electricity meter reading and closing balance of stock of products to the authorities. The manufacturer shall also give notice of restart of production to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee. It is his further submission that, in the earlier order dated 21-10-99 of the Commissioner, he had, inter alia, recorded a finding to the effect that furnace B had been dismantled with effect from 10-3-98 as certified by the assessee s own Chartered Engineer. He submits that, in view of such a finding, it was not open to the Commissioner in the remanded proceedings to reject the abatement claim for 11-3-98 to 19-3-98 on the ground that one furnace was operational during the said period. Counsel submits that furnace C had been dismantled prior to the said period and only furnace B was in working condition and the abatement claim was in respect of the above period of closure of furnace B . Ld. Counsel further submits that, in respe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch decision in Avis Electronics [2000 (117) E.L.T. 571 (Tribunal-LB) = 2000 (37) RLT 501], the DR submits that an assessee claiming the benefit of abatement of duty ought to fulfil all the conditions prescribed by the law. If the assessee fails to do so, he will not be entitled to the benefit. The DR has also relied on the other decisions relied on by the Commissioner. 6. I have examined the submissions. In relation to the period 2-1-98 to 17-1-98, the copies of the notices of closure and restart of the furnace C have been brought to my attention. I find that, in the notice of closure dated 2-1-98, the assessee informed the authorities that furnace C has been closed for 15 days with effect from 2-1-98. In that notice, they have also f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a specific plea before the Commissioner in para 3.1 of their reply to the show-cause notice, wherein they clearly contested the department s allegation that both the furnaces were not closed during 2-1-98 to 17-1-98 and further, referring to numerous earlier correspondence on the subject, the party contended that furnace B had been closed long prior to 2-1-98. I note that this specific plea, which appears to be supported by documentary evidence, has not been considered by the Commissioner. On this aspect, the impugned order discloses total non-application of mind. I would, therefore, set aside the Commissioner s order of rejection of abatement claim for 2-1-98 to 17-1-98 and remand the matter to the Commissioner for de novo decision in ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
