TMI Blog2005 (11) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2, dated 20-2-2002 confirmed the demand of Rs. 41,72,700/- and imposed a penalty of Rs. 10 lakh on the appellants. The appellants approached the Tribunal and the Tribunal in its Final Order No. E/228/03 dated 21-2-03 remanded the matter to the original authority with the following observations. "(c) On a question from the Bench, both sides could not produce any material to indicate what was the total quantity of cement, as per records, if any available, which would have gone in the use of in-house building activity in 1996. This important aspect has to be brought on record to determine what is the total quantity of cement that would have been consumed in the in-house building activity from the total unaccounted production. The matter is t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Commissioner has demanded the duty of Rs. 41,72,700/- under proviso to Section 11(A)(1) of the C.E. Act, 1944 read with Rule 173Q(1) of the C.E. Rules, 1944. Interest under Section 11AB also has been demanded. The appellants strongly challenged the findings of the adjudicating authority. Hence, they have come before this Tribunal for relief. 3. Learned Counsel, Shri B.V. Kumar appeared for the appellants and learned SDR Shri Ganesh Havanur for the Revenue. 4. Learned Counsel adduced the following points. (i) The Tribunal in the remand order has given specific direction for re-determination of the quantity of the cement used in in-house building activity during 1996 and up to February 1997. There was further a direction to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o him by the Hon'ble Tribunal "there is non application of mind". (iv) The Tribunal gave a specific direction to furnish the relied upon documents, namely, Silo dip register for the period April 1992 to February 1997. In spite of three letters written by the appellants to the department the same was not provided. Learned Commissioner observed that the appellants appear to have written their RG 1 on the basis of the dip reading in the Silo dip register. Therefore, there is no justification for the appellants have harped on the issue that the said Register has not been given to them. This is gross violation of the principles of natural justice. (v) There is no evidence to show that during the material period there was excess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the Revenue Audit parties from time to time. RT 12 returns were being regularly filed. The Commissioner has not discussed these submissions in the impugned order. There is no justification for invocation of the longer period. The SCN is clearly time barred as the Commissioner has not given any finding on this. This shows non-application of mind. (ix) Even the department has not determined normal production of the factory under Rule 173E of the C.E. Rules. (x) The main purpose of maintaining the Mill Log Sheet is (a) to know the reasons and duration of equipment stoppages, (b) Co-relate the process parameters with feed rate, (c) to update the equipment records, (d) To take decision for maintenance of equipment, (e) Comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the order set aside by the Tribunal. From the submissions of the learned Counsel it is very clear that the original authority has not taken into account the written submissions given by the appellants on date 17-3-2004 indicating the quantity despatched to depots and quantities utilized for self consumption (in-house). This reveals utter non-application of mind. Moreover, the SCN relies on Silo dip Register. The Tribunal gave a direction to produce the same to the appellants in compliance with the principles of natural justice. This has also not been done. The observations of the Commissioner in the impugned order, regarding non-furnishing of the Register is not satisfactory. This is also a gross violation of the principles of natural jus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|