9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 120X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . If the average is to be taken it will come out about 10% of burning loss. Moreover, this Tribunal also held in the case of Bansal Steel Corporation (1996 (10) TMI 309 - CEGAT, MUMBAI) the burning loss in such activity can occur upto 10%. Admittedly in this case the appellant has claimed the burning loss is 5.8%. Therefore, the appellant has been able to prove the burning loss of 5.8% is appropriate. In these circumstances, as there is no supporting evidences of clandestine removal, the appellant is entitled for burning loss of 5.8% as claimed by the appellant. - appellant has explained that their activities, involves process of heating, hammering and forging certain scaling appears on the top skin of the MS Block and claimed burning loss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... achines as per required sizes. They are then fed into the furnace and heated to the required temperature and thereafter they are repeatedly hammered and forged to the required size and shape. During the process of heating, hammering and forging certain scaling appears on the top skin of the MS Block and the same requires to be removed before further processing. During the course of manufacturing of their product, heating and re-heating of MS Blocks, creates some burning losses. As the appellant was new to their activity and are not maintaining proper stocks to their raw material, finished goods and the account of burning loss, they wrote a letter to the concerned authorities in February 1995 with a request to explain the correct procedure f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e confirmed the duty demand of remaining shortage of goods. Aggrieved by the order, the appellant is before me. 3. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the allegation against the appellant is that they have removed the goods clandestinely but it has not been proved by the Revenue with supporting evidence that the goods have been removed clandestinely. Moreover, right from beginning the claim of the appellant is that there was a burning loss during the process of manufacturing but the same has not been considered while issuing show cause notice. In the impugned order, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) had considered that there may be 2% of burning loss. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has not given any reason on what bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Alloys v. Commissioner - 2013 (293) E.L.T. A95 (Guj.) and submits that the appellant is liable to pay duty along with interest. 5. Heard the parties and considered their submissions. 6. In this case the issue before me is that whether the appellant is entitled to claim the burning loss of 5.8% or not and whether the appellant succeeds on limitation or not as directed by the remand order of this Tribunal dated 25-7-2005. Admittedly the appellant has explained that there is a burning loss in the manufacturing process. Therefore, as there is some mistake in recording the statutory records about the burning loss, the Revenue cannot claim that there is a clandestine removal of the goods. The only issue remaining now is that whether the bur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
