9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 991X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yst, etc. which directly or indirectly affect on and cause variation in the production of formaldehyde. The revenue has not conducted any physical experiment to arrive at the actual production. Otherwise also I find that in the absence of the corroborative evidence, the confirmation of demand stands rightly set aside by Commissioner (Appeals) - Decided against Revenue. - E/2279/2006-EX(SM) - Final Order No. A/51994/2014-SM(BR) - Dated:- 28-4-2014 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (J) Shri M.S. Negi, AR, for the Appellant. Shri Jaydeep Kaur, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) revenue has filed the present appeal. I have heard Shri M.S. Negi learned AR appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the Department has worked out the production of formaldehyde from 8211.400 MT of methanol to be 19136.669 MT whereas the appellants have produced as per their book record 16591.732 MT of formaldehyde. The appellants have stated that there are various factors, which directly or indirectly affect the production. They are producing formaldehyde by the silver catalyst method. I find force in the appellants contention that the various factors viz. purity of air, voltage availability, purity of water and purity of catalyst that is silver etc. do play an important role and thus affect the production procedure of formation of formaldehyde from methanol. That is what the difference between science and technology. While everything appears near per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... formaldehyde has been put forth by the Department. In view of the above I hold that no duty is payable on the alleged clandestine manufacture and removal of 2544.937 MT of formaldehyde. Consequently no penalty is imposable on them. In view of this the demand for confirmation of duty and penalty of ₹ 29,18,568/- each is set aside. 4. Revenue is in appeal against the said part. Learned DR appearing for the Revenue reiterated the grounds of appeal but fairly agrees that apart from chemical formula, there is no other evidence to show clandestine removal of the goods. It is a well settled that the charges of clandestine removal cannot be upheld on the basis of such theoretical productions calculated on the basis of chemical formula. Ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
