9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted to exercise the option of payment of duty under Rule 96ZP (3), they are not entitled ti retract their stand. The appellant is not entitled to abatement/proportionate reduction of duty - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Appeal No. E/586/08 - FO/A/76104/2018 - Dated:- 12-3-2018 - SHRI P.K. CHOUDHARY, MEMBER(JUDICIAL) And SHRI C.J. MATHEW, MEMBER(TECHNICAL) NONE for the Appellant (s) Shri A.Roy, Supdt.(AR) for the Revenue ORDER Per CORAM. This is the second round of litigation before the Tribunal. The Tribunal in their order No.A-1090/KOL/07 dated 04.06.2007 remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority. It is not in dispute that the appellant started trial production on 19.10.1998 and subse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Rule (2) Where a manufacture does not produce the hot re-rolled products of non-alloy steel during any continuous period of not less than seven days and wishes to claim abatement under sub-section (3) of section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the abatement will be allowed by an order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise of such amount as may be specified in such order, subject to the fulfillment of the following conditions, namely:- (a) The manufacturer shall inform in writing about the closure to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, with a copy to the Superintendent of Central Excise, either prior to the date of closure or on the date of closure; (b) The manufacturer shall intimate the reading of the el ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3) of rule 3 of the Hot Re-rolling Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997, and the amount so paid shall be deemed to be full and final discharge of his duty liability for the period from the 1 st day of August, 1997 to 31 st day of March, 1998, or any other financial year, as the case may be, subject to the condition that the manufacturer shall not avail of the benefit, if any, under the proviso to sub-section (3) or under sub-section (4) of the section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944): Provided that in respect of the non-alloy steel hot re-rolled products, manufactured or produced by a re-rolling mill in which the nominal diameter on last stand does not exceed 200 millimetres, the sum payable under this sub-rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wed to claim abatement of duty during the closure period. In the present case, we find that the appellant opted to pay duty under Rule 96ZP(3) at the rate of ₹ 300/- per MT Rule 96ZP(3) did not allow abatement of duty. It is well settled that once the appellant opted to exercise the option of payment of duty under Rule 96ZP (3), they are not entitled ti retract their stand. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the adjudicating authority. 5. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that the appellant is not entitled to abatement/proportionate reduction of duty. Accordingly the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed. (Operative part of the order was pronounced in the open co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
