2004 (2) TMI 530

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Member (J)]. Heard both sides. 2. Appellants filed this appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise whereby the Commissioner allowed change of parameters of the Rolling mill with effect from 30-7-99. 3. The contention of the appellants is that annual capacity of their rolling mill was fixed by the Commission .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ange parameters of the rolling mill and thereafter revised the annual capacity of their rolling mill with effect from 30-7-99 on which date parameters were verified by the excise officials. 4. The contention of the appellants is that as the parameters were changed w.e.f. 26-10-98, therefore, the annual capacity of the rolling mill is to be determined from that date. 5. The contention of the Re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... entral Excise on 1-1-99. The appellants again wrote a letter on 24-7-99 stating that parameters of their mill has been changed from 26-10-98 and asked for redetermination of the annual capacity. The Commissioner of Central Excise vide letter dated 28-7-99 responded to the request of the appellants and allowed change in parameters. In this letter, the Deputy Commissioner admitted the receipt of let .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X