2006 (6) TMI 389

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellant. Shri Gregory, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - The Commissioner has demanded Rs. 45 lakhs from the appellants for the period September 1997 to March 1998. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of re-rolled products of iron and steel during the above period and were working under compounded levy scheme under Rule 96ZP of the Central Ex....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....le 5. It is contended that Rule 5 was not applicable for a period during which there was change of parameters of furnace. Ld. Counsel has also claimed the benefit of abatement of duty for the period from 4-3-98. In any case, according to the Counsel, demand of duty in excess of Rs. 25 lakhs cannot be sustained in law. In other words, the appellants are conceding duty liability to the extent of Rs.....