2006 (1) TMI 520

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. - The appellant is aggrieved with the Order-in-Original No. 14/99 dated 31-8-99 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-I Commissionerate determining the annual production in terms of Rule 5 on the Hot Re-rolled products manufactured by the appellants under Hot Re-Rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determinati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Commissioner was not justified in taking into consideration the dismantled furnace also for determining the duty. 3. The learned SDR submits that the evidences have not been considered by the Commissioner and therefore, it is a fit case for de novo consideration. 4. On a careful consideration, we notice that the assessee had informed the Commissioner vide their letter dated 17-1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ened on the appellant because of the inaction of Revenue, especially when the assessee has informed about the change in production capacity and for re-determination of duty based on such changed capacity permissible under Rule. We accept the prayer for remand of the matter and set aside the impugned order. The Commissioner has to reconsider the assessee's submission in the light of the documents p....