9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 75X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch different rates of excise duty has been prescribed for units manufacturing cement on the basis of the type of manufacturing plant, and on the basis of form, in which the clearances are affected by the unit concerned. The appellant's factory does not qualify as mini cement plant as defined in the notification. Thus the Tribunal rightly found that the appellant does not have a prima facie case for waiver of the excise duty and the interest. Since the appellant-company has not ceased production, and is making payments to the bank and financial institutions no substance in the plea of undue hardship or financial hardship in depositing the amount - the period of deposit is extended by six weeks from today - against assessee. - CENTRAL EXC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le to grey cement manufactured by the appellant-unit beyond the limit of SSI exemptions. The Tribunal has found that the entry at Serial No.28 relates to white cement and not grey cement manufactured by the appellant-company. No other type of cement has been granted abatement by any notification. The Tribunal also referred to show cause notice, in which the notification dated 1.3.2006, as amended, prescribes the effective rate of duty for excisable goods falling under Tariff item 2523 29 in which different rates of excise duty has been prescribed for units manufacturing cement on the basis of the type of manufacturing plant, and on the basis of form, in which the clearances are affected by the unit concerned. The appellant's factory doe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d same submissions in the earlier appeal, and did not find any error in the order of the Tribunal. 6. In this case the Tribunal has given additional reason that the appellant was put on notice that during the period in question he was required to pay excise duty on the goods cleared by him as per Notification dated 1.3.2006, and thus it cannot be said that the impugned order has gone beyond the scope of show cause notice. 7. In this appeal the appellant has raised an additional question of hardship. It is submitted that the appellant-company was declared as Sick Industrial Company by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction on 17.8.1999 under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provision) Act, 1985, and that a rehabilita ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
