2009 (5) TMI 489

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bramanian, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri V.V. Hariharan, JCDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: P. Karthikeyan, Member (T)]. - These are two appeals filed by M Panchsheel Alloys Construction Pvt. Ltd., (PACPL). PACPL are engaged in the manufacture of Non-Alloy Steel Ingots & Billets and paid duty on the fin shed goods under the Compounded Levy Scheme in terms of Section 3A of Central Exci....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....99 to December'99 Rs.34,99,998/- 7. O.C.NO.736/2000 Dated 5-9-2000 January 2000 to March 2000 Rs.17,49,999/- 2. The Commissioner found in adjudication that the appellants had claimed abatements for various periods as follows:- Period of which Abatement No. of days for which abatement claimed Amount Time of closure and reopening 2-1-98 to 16-1-98 15 days Rs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rs.3,63,179/- on M/s PACPL, under Rule 96(ZO)(3) of CER. Relying on a report dated 23-8-2000, sent to the Deputy Commissioner by the jurisdictional range Superintendent, the appellants have claimed that they were eligible for abatement for more days for the periods of closure of the factory. 3. We have heard both sides. We find that as regards abatements claimed for the period 2-1-98 to 16-1-9....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e report of the jurisdictional range Superintendent. Therefore, they are eligible for abatement for 10 days and 9 days for these spells as claimed by them as against respectively 9 days and 8 days allowed in the impugned order. The appellants have made excess payment of an amount of Rs.1,54,937 for the month of August'97 as noted in the impugned order. Considering the entitlement of abatement of t....