Abatement of duty for furnace closure allowed despite missing hour-wise intimation, where closure was otherwise duly communicated.

Abatement of duty under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was available where the assessee had intimated furnace closure and recommencement by letter, even without stating the exact hours. The Tribunal found that repeated departmental intimation, supported by electricity correspondence and the record of power restrictions, established the factual closure. It held that when the date of closure and reopening is communicated, the closure may be taken from the start of that date, and absence of hour-wise notice does not defeat abatement where the closure is otherwise undisputed. The demand was therefore not sustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to abatement of duty under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 despite not intimating the exact hours of closure and recommencement of the furnace.

Analysis: The assessee had repeatedly informed the department about closure and restarting of the furnace through several letters, supported by electricity-related correspondence and the High Court record showing power restrictions. The rejection of abatement rested only on the absence of specific hour-wise intimation. The Tribunal held that where the date of closure and reopening was intimated, the closure could be taken from the beginning of that date, and the absence of exact hours did not defeat the claim when the factual closure was otherwise undisputed.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to abatement and the demand was not sustainable.

---