1998 (6) TMI 140

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Commissioner of Central Excise vide his order dated 30-8-1997 determining the Annual Capacity of Production of two numbers of Induction Furnace installed in the factory of the appellant as 6.0 MTs. However, in the tabulation below the said order, there is a column reading "ACP DETERMINED IN Mts." and here it has been recorded that `ACP determined' is 6400.00 MTs for each of the two furnaces i.e. total of 12,800.00 MTs. This determination has been done under provisions of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the rules thereunder. 3. Aggrieved by this determination, the appellants wrote vide their letter dated 1-9-1997 to the learned Commissioner asking for a redetermination of the Annual Capacity Production for certain reas....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for consideration as a sequence to the chronology narrated above. 6. Heard learned Chartered Accountant, Shri Ravi Shankar. He reiterated the facts as narrated above and cited the decision in the case of Ranjeev Alloys Ltd. v. C.C.E - 1998 (102) E.L.T. 346 (Tribunal) = 1998 (26) RLT 590 (CEGAT) wherein it was held that an order passed under sub-section (2) of Section 3A of Central Excise Act, 1944 by the Commissioner fixing the Annual Capacity Production is a final order and therefore appealable under Central Excise law. In that case also, there had been a request to that Commissioner for redetermining the Annual Capacity of production which had not been done. The Hon'ble Tribunal had remanded the matter to the learned Commissioner ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the impugned order-in-original dated 31-3-1998 shows that not even one reason has been given for arriving at a decision that initial determination of ACP was correct and therefore no further re-determination could be ordered. As against this, we find that detailed written submissions as well as oral submissions were given before the learned Commissioner at the time of personal hearing. It has been held in the case law cited by learned Chartered Accountant supra that these proceedings arising out of determination as well as redetermination of the Annual Capacity of Production under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 amounts to a final order and is therefore appealable. The Hon'ble Tribunal in this decision has held that such orde....