9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 416X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asis of Dr. Batra's Report on output ratio based on electrical consumption. The earlier eight Show Cause Notices are for the period 2002-03 to 2010. All the Show Cause Notices were initially decided by the adjudicating authority against the party and the demands were confirmed. The appellants had filed their appeal before the Tribunal.
Conclusion - The allegations of suppressing manufacture were not substantiated, as the reliance on Dr. Batra's report was deemed unreliable based on previous precedents.
The Tribunal had remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority to go through all the documentary evidence placed before him and to pass a considered decision - Appeal allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the demand. Being aggrieved, the appellant had approached the Hon'ble Tribunal with their appeals. This Bench vide order No. 78162 to 78200/2017 dated 28.11.2017, remanded the matter for denovo decision by the adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority, while deciding the denovo issue before him, has relied on the case law of R. A. Castings Pvt. Ltd. v. C. C. E. Meerut-I-2009-237-ELT-674-(Tri-Delhi) and other case laws and has given the finding that the reliance on the technical report prepared by Prof. N. K. Batra of IIT Kanpur as a faculty member and not by IIT Kanpur, as alleged in the SCNs, in misplaced to fasten the allegation of excess production. Relying on the case law of R. A. Castings, the adjudicating authority has dr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laced before him and to pass a considered decision. The adjudicating authority in the Denovo OIO No. 22-29/Denovo/COMMR /2024 dated 26.03.2024 has held that the allegations of the Department do not stand legal scrutiny since they have relied only on the report of Dr. Batra, which has been held as non-reliable in the case of R.A. Casting Pvt. Ltd., Vs. CCE, Meerut. Accordingly, he has dropped all the proceedings. The Department has not preferred any further appeal against this OIO. Therefore it gets clarified that the department has accepted the findings of this OIO. In the present case, the proceedings have been initiated for the subsequent period on the same grounds. 9. We find that the adjudicating authority in the denovo Order-in-Origin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
