2011 (3) TMI 2

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e compound levy scheme for Hot-Re-rolling mills, under the Annual Capacity determination Rules 1997 because otherwise, it is a separate scheme for the collection of Central Excise Duty for the goods manufactured in the country.   2. In order to record a definite finding on the aforesaid issue it would be necessary to set out certain facts leading to filing of the present appeals.   3. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of iron and steel products falling under Chapter 72 and 73 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During the period ranging from 01.09.1997 to 31.3.2000, the goods manufactured by the appellants were chargeable to Central Excise Duty in terms of Section 3A of the Act. As per the Act, the duty was s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the final re-determination, the Central Excise Department issued a demand notice under Section 11 of the Act, for recovery of duty. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, whereby and whereunder the High Court set aside the demand notice and directed the revenue to re-determine the annual capacity.   7. On 04.01.2001, the Commissioner of Central Excise re-adjudicated the matter and determined the annual capacity of the period 1.09.97 to 31.3.2000 to be 1890MT. The appellant filed an appeal before the Tribunal against the same. On 08.04.2002, the larger bench of the Tribunal, held that in case of the manufacturer operating under Compound Levy Scheme in terms of Section 3A ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed that there is no exception in the Central Excise Act or Rules regarding the procedure of recovery.   10. The aforesaid submissions of the counsel appearing for the appellants were however refuted by the counsel appearing for the respondent. The learned counsel for the respondent has pointed out that under the Compound Levy Scheme, the appellants opted for the payment of duty at compounded rates and filed declarations furnishing details about annual capacity of production and duty payable on such capacity of production. Once the commissioner approved such applications, payments are to be made in terms of Rule 96ZP of the Rules.   11.We have already set out the issue which falls for our consideration in these present appeal....