2015 (10) TMI 2713

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of differential duty - Held that: - It is a fact that the change of parameter was noticed only on surprise check by the officers - It is also a fact that the appellants had declared gearbox of 195 mm. in their earlier declaration on 26.08.97. When the Annual Capacity was fixed by the Commissioner based on the declarations made by the appellant, it is not open to the appellant to change some of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 96 ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 on the basis of Annual Production Capacity. Certain verifications were conducted in the premises of the appellant and consequently, proceedings were initiated against the appellant for demanding differential duty for the period 8.10.97 to 30.04.98. The proceedings concluded vide the impugned order wherein differenti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pinion stand of 195 mm. was put into operation immediately after physical verification earlier conducted by the officers on 7.10.97 is not correct. He submitted that it is only for 5 days from 23.02.98 to 28.02.98, the pinion stand of 195 mm. was fixed in the machine. As such, he submitted that demanding differential duty for the whole period is not sustainable. 3. Ld. Authorised Representative r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... em. It is a fact that the appellant failed to inform the change in the parameter to the Department. Their plea that the change was only for a few days is not supported by any documentary evidence or corroboration. The undated communication of M/s. Gandhi Machine Tools is the only evidence the appellant relied on. It is seen that the appellant have filed a declaration on 26.08.97, wherein they decl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on to claim that it is only a temporary change. Since there is no evidence of the exact date of the change in the parameter submitted by appellant, we are in agreement that the capacity of production as fixed by the Commissioner based on 195mm. is sustainable. Accordingly, we find no merit in the appeal and dismiss the same. [Operative part of the order pronounced in the open Court]
Case la .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X