9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esh adjudication. 3. The facts of the case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of MS Ingots, liable to central excise duty. Certain investigations were conducted against the respondent and proceeding were initiated against them for demanding duty of excise on unaccounted production and clearance of MS ingots during October 2000 to August 2005. After due process the case was decided by the original authority. On appeal, the matter was remanded back to the original authority by the Tribunal for fresh decision. The original authority vide impugned order dropped the demand against the respondent. Revenue has filed this appeal against this order. 4. Heard the ld.A.R. for Revenue. None appeared on behalf of the respondent. W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the ancillary purpose other than running of an Induction Furnace has also not been challenged. f) The details of other alternative consumption of electricity is as follows:- i) Cutting of scrap by electric welding machine and cutters. ii) Use of overhead crane for feeding of raw material, lifting of finished material from furnace to the pit side and from pit side to the loading area. Since the ingot from furnace is not the same can only be handled by a crane. iii) Running of motors for drawing under ground water feeding the same to overhead tank running of cooling tower and running of continuous water in Induction Furnace water cooling coils. iv) Running of big propeller fans for keeping the Induction Furnace from outside cool and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ckground of power consumption and quantity of raw material and final goods manufactured by the respondent. After detailed analysis and relying on various higher judicial authorities, the impugned order concluded that demand cannot be sustained. 8. We find, as already noted, the Department in the present appeal has not brought out any evidence to corroborate clandestine manufacture or clearance of excisable goods. Even if it is considered that high power consumption has not been satisfactorily explained, based on that alone, charge of clandestine manufacture cannot be upheld. Reference can be made to Hon'ble Supreme Court s decision in Oudh Sugar Mills Ltd. 1978 (2) ELE (J 172) (SC). The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that charge of clandestine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
