TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 996
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fficer not below the rank of Director of Industries in the State Government. Based on certain enquiry, proceedings were initiated against the appellant to deny the concessional rate of duty as above. After due process the case was adjudicated by the Original Authority vide order dated 04.09.2000. On appeal the Tribunal vide Final Order No.60-62/2002-C dated 15.03.2002 remanded the matter to the Original Adjudicating Authority with the following directions:- "We, in the interest of justice, remand the matter to the Adjudicating Authority with direction to approach the Competent Authority under the Notification to certify the installed capacity of the unit at the relevant time after taking into consideration all the facts, material and evidence furnished by both the sides. Thereafter, the Adjudicating Authority will re-adjudicate the matter afresh in accordance with law" 2. The case was re-adjudicated by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Indore. The Commissioner vide his order dated 23.09.2003 again denied the benefit of Notification and confirmed a demand of Rs. 6,22,02,982/-. He also imposed equal amount of penalty each on the appellant assessee; Rs. 20.00 Lacs penalt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent authority. It was certificate that the installed capacity of the appellant as 1,98,000 M.Ts. per annum. The Directorate General of Anti Evasion took up the matter with the Director of Industries, Madhya Pradesh, who vide amendment dated 26.04.1997 amended the certificate to indicate that the capacity is as per registration certificate produced by the Unit. The Director of Industries in his further certificate dated 09.09.1997 cancelled the amendment and confirmed the earlier certificate dated 27.07.1995 to the effect that the installed capacity of the appellant is 1,98,000/- M.T. P.A. The ld. Counsel submitted that the whole case against the appellant is on the ground that certificate issued by the Director of Industries, Madhya Pradesh is not acceptable to the Central Excise Department and based on various communications and documents obtained during enquiry, the installed capacity of the appellant was alleged to have been much higher than 1,98,000 T.P.A., making them ineligible for the concession claimed as above. When the case was adjudicated for the first time denying the exemption to the appellant, based on the appeal filed by the appellant, the Tribunal remanded the matte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... various core machines and equipments installed in the plant of the appellant have capacity to achieve the installed capacity of 2,47,500 T.P.A. The appellants themselves claimed higher installed capacity to various authorities including banks and Government authorities. 6. As such the ld. A.R. submitted that the denial of exemption is justified and there is no merit in the present appeal. 7. We have heard both sides and examined the appeal records. This is the third round of litigation in the present case. The issue involved is the installed capacity of the appellant vis-`-vis their eligibility to Notification No.24/91 and 5/93-CE. The concession of Notification is available when the installed capacity is not exceeding1,98,000 T.P.A. It is admitted fact that the Director of Industries, Madhya Pradesh, who is designated as a competent authority in the Notification itself has more than once certified the installed capacity of the appellant to be 1,98,000/- T.P.A. As observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in normal circumstances such a certificate is to be acted upon. The Hon'ble Supreme Court directed this Tribunal to examine the various material relied on by the Revenue to con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....representation or not presenting full facts the only option left to the department is to approach the competent authority with all the evidences to modify/cancel the certificate issued already. The Department did approach not only the Director of Industries but also Commissioner of Industries with all the evidences which were examined and the certificate was reiterated by the competent authority. As already noted, no other evidence was left to be considered. 8. Apart from the above, we also examined the evidences relied upon by the Revenue to question the certificate of the competent authority. These evidences are basically the appellants declaration in the Board meeting, prospectus of the company for raising fund through issue of shares, declaration to banks/financial institutions and suppliers of equipments. The appellants also declared their installed capacity as 2,47,000 T.P.A. to various Tax Authorities and other departments like Mining, Natural Recourses, Pollution Control Industry etc. for availing various concessions. These claims made by the appellants before various authorities can at best raise the suspicion of the correctness of the installed capacity as mentioned in....