2003 (4) TMI 445

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... haudhary, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Member (J)]. Appellants filed this appeal against the Order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of M.S. ingots. Appellants were using induction furnace for production of the final product, therefore, are liable to pay central excise .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . 5. The contention of the appellants is that they wrote letter dated 12-5-98. The Commissioner of Central Excise after verifying the record held that no such letter was received by the Revenue Department. The onus is on the appellants to prove that such letter was received by the Revenue Authority and we find that appellants failed to discharge this onus. Further we find that at the request of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X