2015 (10) TMI 1221

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... te, Ms. Dimple Gohil, Advocate For Respondent: Shri G.P. Thomas, Authorised Representative Per: P.K. Das Heard both sides and perused the case records. 2. The appellant was engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Ingots, notified under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act 1944. The Central Excise duty was calculated on the basis of Annual Capacity of production determined under Induction Furnace An .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... v s. Alwar Processors Pvt. Ltd vs. Alwar Processors Pvt. Ltd. 2014 (308) E.L.T. 720 (Tri. - Del) 4. Shreeji Concast Ltd. vs. CCE, Rajkot 2002 (139) E.L.T. 131 (Tri. - Mumbai) 5. For the purpose of proper appreciation of the case, the relevant portion of the decision in the case of M/s Krishna Processors (supra) is reproduced below:- "17.4 Thus, any obligation or liability etc. acquired, accrued .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 6ZQ, 96ZP and 96ZO are not the charging provisions. The charging provision is Section 3A of the Act and Rules 96ZQ etc. are merely machinery provisions. Thus, any liability which accrues is under Section 3A of the Act. Accordingly, when the charging Section itself is deleted without any saving clause, no recovery under the said Section can be made by resorting to Rule 96ZQ of the Rules. Action, if .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X