Once-only duty option under compounded levy scheme cannot be switched mid-year without proof of a received request.

A manufacturer who had already opted for duty payment under the compounded levy scheme on the basis of annual furnace capacity could not switch in the same financial year to assessment on actual production. The governing principle was that the option under the scheme was exercisable only once in a financial year, and the burden to prove that any later request for change was actually received by the Revenue lay on the assessee. As the alleged request was not shown to have been received, the change of option was not permitted and the existing order was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee could, after opting for determination and payment of duty on the basis of furnace capacity under sub-rule (3) of Rule 96ZO, later seek a change to actual production basis in the same financial year, and whether the alleged request for such change was proved to have been received by the Revenue.

Analysis: The assessee had already filed a declaration and opted for duty payment under the compounded levy scheme on the basis of annual furnace capacity, which was determined accordingly. The alleged subsequent request for change was found not to have been received by the Revenue, and the burden to prove receipt lay on the assessee. The governing principle was that the manufacturer could exercise the option once in a financial year and could not first choose payment under sub-rule (3) of Rule 96ZO and thereafter switch over to actual production basis under Section 3A(4) of the Central Excise Act.

Conclusion: The assessee was not entitled to change the option in the same financial year, and the impugned order was upheld.

---