9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on, is the number of operating machines installed in the factory during the month and the retail sale price printed on the pouches and not on the basis of actual production. It is clear from the above Circular of C.B.E.C. that number of packing machines, operating during the month, is the only relevant factor which forms the basis for determination of deemed production and the duty liability, in terms of Rule 5 of the Capacity Determination Rules, 2008; and not any other factor such as, speed of the machines etc. The impugned orders, adopting the declared speed of the machines as the basis and consequently determination of the deemed quantity of production, are not correct and hence not sustainable under the law. - E/54971/2014-EX [SM] - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 2.00 (iii) 02 machines ₹ 5.00 2.3 Out of the total 60 machines, 8 nos. of machines were purchased by the appellant from M/s Uflex Ltd., Noida, i.e. 3 nos. in November'2011, 4 nos. in February' 2012 and 1 no. in march'2012. Speed of these 8 machines was declared as 200 pouches per minute per machine. 2.4 The Central Excise Department initiated proceedings against the appellant on the ground that the capacity of 8 nos. of new machines purchased by the appellant from M/s Uflex Ltd., Noida, is more than double of production, as specified under Rule 5 of the Capacity Determination Rules, 2008. The show cause notice issued in this regard was adjudicated by the ld. Assistant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he pouches. It is further submitted by the appellant that the orders passed by the lower authorities are based on the presumption that the declared speed of the high speed machines purchased by the appellant, each 200 pouches per minute and hence the deemed production would be taken as twice the production, shown in Rule 5 of the 2008 Rules, since under the said Rule the deemed production is fixed taking into account the capacity as 100 pouches per minute. Thus the appellant submits that the findings of the authorities below are contrary to the provisions of Rule 4 5 of the Capacity Determination Rules, 2008. To support the above view, the appellant has placed reliance on the C.B.E.C. Circular No.980/04/2014 dated 24.01.2014. 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
