2011 (4) TMI 647

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....if the factory was non-operational (if there was no manufacture) in a month for less than 15 days but more than 15 days continuously ranging between days in two months, abatement cannot be allowed.   2. No one appeared for the respondent. We have heard the learned SDR who supports the case of the Revenue and submits the point made in the stay application and appeal for consideration.   3. After hearing the learned SDR and going through the records, we find that this is a case involving issue in a narrow compass. After going through the show-cause notice and the order of the lower authorities, we find that the issue can be finally decided at this stage itself and no further hearing is required. Accordingly, we allow the early....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... intimation to this effect with the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise or the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, with a copy to the Superintendent of Central Excise, at least seven days prior to the commencement of said period, who on receipt of such intimation shall direct for sealing of all the packing machines available in the factory for the said period under the physical supervision of Superintendent of Central Excise, in the manner that these cannot be operated during the said period. Provided that during such period, no manufacturing activity, whatsoever, in respect of notified goods shall be undertaken and no removal of goods shall be effected by the manufacturer.   On scrutiny of the refund cla....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o be non-operational, the original adjudicating authority rejected the refund claim. Here itself, there is a confusion, as can be seen between two paragraphs of the show-cause notice and the conclusions of the original adjudicating authority. There is no clear indication as to whether there was any clearance during the month of August, 2008 when the factory was non-operational for 19 days. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) considered the issue and has taken a view that just because there was clearance during the relevant period, the abatement cannot be disallowed in view of the fact that Rule 10 of Pan Masala Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 (Rules for short) is similar to sub-rule (b) of Rule 9....