2001 (3) TMI 493 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal Upholds Commissioner's Actions in Certification Dispute

The appeals were dismissed as the Tribunal found no merit in the appellants' contentions. The Commissioner's actions were deemed compliant with the remand ... Production capacity based duty - Annual capacity of production Issues:- Violation of natural justice in earlier orders challenged- Inspection of furnaces in rolling mills to determine type- Appellants' grievance regarding furnace type and rolling mill speed- Compliance with remand order by Commissioner- Expertise of NISST experts and their certification- Lack of objection during proceedings regarding rolling mill speed- Request for setting aside Commissioner's orders and remandAnalysis:The judgment pertains to appeals arising from a previous challenge to orders of the Commissioner on grounds of natural justice violation. In the remand order, the Commissioner was directed to inspect the furnaces in the rolling mills of the appellants to determine whether they were of the batch type or pusher type, along with technical experts. Subsequently, the Commissioner, accompanied by experts from the National Institute of Secondary Steel Technology (NISST), certified the furnaces as pusher type based on their inspection. The appellants' main contention was that their rolling mills were low speed mills, and only batch type furnaces were compatible with such mills. However, the Commissioner's orders were based on the experts' certification, and the appellants did not raise the speed factor during the proceedings before the adjudicating authority.The Tribunal noted that the Commissioner had diligently followed the remand order by inspecting the furnaces with NISST experts and accepting their certification. The NISST experts' authority and expertise were acknowledged, and the Commissioner's reliance on their certification was deemed appropriate. The appellants' failure to challenge the certification or present their own experts to contest it further weakened their argument. The Tribunal found no grounds to interfere with the Commissioner's orders, especially since the speed factor regarding rolling mills was not raised during the proceedings before the Commissioner.In conclusion, the appeals were dismissed as the Tribunal found no merit in the appellants' contentions. The Commissioner's actions were deemed to be in compliance with the remand order, and the expertise of the NISST experts in certifying the furnace type was upheld. The failure of the appellants to raise objections regarding the rolling mill speed during the proceedings further supported the dismissal of the appeals.