2002 (9) TMI 597

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order]. This is an appeal against the order dated 28-2-2001 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Meerut-1. The issue relates to abatement of duty for closure period. 2. Shri Alok Arora, learned Advocate has appeared on behalf of the appellant and he submitted that the period in dispute is from 1-9-97 to 8-9-97; that the intimation of closure of factory was given by registered .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t that filing of intimation by registered post is the date of filing; on both the occasions i.e. 1-9-97 and on 8-9-97, the intimation was given by registered post; he also relied on the decision in the case of Singareni Steels P. Ltd. reported in 2001 (130) E.L.T. 468 to the effect that the calculation of number of days the factory was closed are resumed should be calculated from zero hours; that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o observe the conditions as mentioned in sub-clauses (a) to (d) of Rule 96ZO(2); that in support of his contention, learned SDR has relied on the Larger Bench decision in the case of Avis Electronics P. Ltd. reported in 2000 (117) E.L.T. 571 referring to Paras 6 and 8 thereof to the effect that the Tribunal is not to supplement or add words to the Rules; that when a particular thing is directed to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X