Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2014 (8) TMI 283

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... later period - Held that:- The Commissioner fails to record a finding whether the appellant remitted the Excise Duty due on the capacity of 3 M.T. for the relevant period i.e. 1.9.97 to 31.3.98. The Commissioner also fails to record a finding whether the report of the Asstt. Commissioner (as to the appellant having paid correct duty for the relevant period) is accepted. To this extent, the impugned order violates the mandate of this Tribunal's order dated 9.3.2001. In the operative portion of the Order, the Commissioner records that the capacity of furnace is 3 M.T; and the annual production capacity is fixed at 9600 MT. On this aspect the appellant has no grievance. The Commissioner further ordered that the appellant shall pay Duty accordi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed by provisions of Section 3 A of the Act read with Rule 96 ZO(3)of the Central Excise Rules, which provide for payment of duty on compounded basis, upto 31.03.1998. 3. Appellant filed a declaration on 21.08.97 along with a copy of a purchase order issued by (M/s. Inductotherm (India) Ltd.), a manufacturer, for supply of an induction furnace installed in the appellant's factory, in compliance with Notification no.24/97-CE (NT) dated 25.7.97, Notification no.33/97-CE (NT) dated 1.8.97 as amended by Notification no.44/97-CE (NT) dated 30.08.97 read with Rule 96(ZO)(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 declaring one furnace of a capacity of 3 MT and sought determination of the annual production capacity in respect of the induction furn .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the supplier of the induction furnace. This Tribunal recorded the contention of the appellant that it had already remitted Excise Duty on the basis of production capacity being 3 M.T. and that no duty demand would arise and directed the Commissioner to verify this claim of the appellant (as to having remitted the excise duty in accordance with the production capacity), for the period in issue. 6. Aggrieved by the Tribunal's order dated 9.3.2001, Revenue preferred a reference to the Allahabad High Court, which was rejected on merits. 7. The impugned order is thereafter passed, pursuant to the remand ordered by this Tribunal, on 9.3.2001. This order records observations of the Commissioner that in order to verify whether the appell .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n the concluding paras of the order, the ld. Commissioner again records the fact, of the Asstt. Commissioner having forwarded a report dated 24.8.2005 informing that the appellant paid duty on the basis of the furnace capacity of 3 M.T. during the period 1.9.97 to 31.3.98; but had short paid duty for the subsequent period i.e. April, 1998 to June, 1998 and that some duty is due for the later period. 11. The Commissioner however fails to record a finding whether the appellant remitted the Excise Duty due on the capacity of 3 M.T. for the relevant period i.e. 1.9.97 to 31.3.98. The Commissioner also fails to record a finding whether the report of the Asstt. Commissioner (as to the appellant having paid correct duty for the relevant period) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Commissioner was mandated to: (a) determine the capacity of the appellants furnace on the basis of the invoice of the supplier and to determine the annual capacity production in terms thereof; and (b) determine and record a finding whether the appellant paid Excise Duty in terms of the annual production capacity determined, for the period 1.9.97 to 31.3.98. 15. The obligation to record findings on both the above aspects is the unavoidable consequence of clear directions by this Tribunal vide its order dated 9.3.2001. The Commissioner however recorded a finding on the annual production capacity (in terms of the order of this Tribunal) but failed to comply with the direction, to record a finding on whether the appellant remit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates