9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (9) TMI 649X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Revenue and Shri S.N. Sinha Mahapatra, ld. Advocate, for the respondents. 3. The respondents were issued the above show cause notice raising demand of duty of Rs. 42,00,000/- for the period September, 1997 to March, 1998 on the alleged ground that they have failed to pay duty at the rate of Rs. 750/- per MT on the pro rata production of annual capacity fixed by the proper officer in terms of the Induction Furnace Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 in respect of non-alloy steel ingots. The respondents during the course of adjudication before the Commissioner categorically stated that their factory was closed from 1st August to 17th August, 1997 and thereafter they stopped the production of non-alloy steel ingots and instead commen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rly brought on record through various documents and reports of the Assistant Commissioner and the Superintendent. Their declaration under provisions 173B of the Rule have been admitted by the Superintendent, and therefore, there is no reason to disbelief the version of the assessee, which has been duly supported by the Superintendent and the Assistant Commissioner after due verification and after taking the cognizance of their closure of factory from 1st August, 97 to 17th August, 97 and their subsequent switching of production to other products. Although, the letter of the assessee dated 18th August, 97 addressed to the Commissioner, Central Excise, Patna, get a mention of production of other castings or stainless steel products and also i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 5. The Revenue in their present appeal has mainly contested that the findings of the Commissioner are not correct inasmuch as if the respondent was not producing non-alloy ingots and billets, there was no need for determination of annual capacity. They have also contended that the presence of ingots billets, moulds in the respondents factory is contrary to the declaration submitted by them that no such ingots, billets were manufactured by them. They have also relied on to the letter dated 18-8-97 written by the respondents to the effect that they would be producing castings and non-alloy products and also incidentally produce non-alloy steel ingots and billets. Accordingly, the Revenue has prayed that the proposal in the show cause no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
