2017 (3) TMI 933

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e case are that the respondents are engaged in the manufacture of Sodium Silicate falling under Chapter Heading 28391100 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, 1985. During the course of audit of the records on the basis of input output ratio, it was alleged that they have shown less production of 3017 MT of finished goods. On being pointed out, the appellant debited the entire amount of duty. Later a show cause notice was issued to them proposing appropriation of central excise duty of Rs. 36,40,720/- already paid and recovery of interest along with proposal for penalty. On adjudication, the amount paid was appropriated and penalty of equal amount and interest were confirmed. Aggrieved by the said order, the Respondent filed appeal before the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e input-output ratio was 2.5 kgs. of sodium silicate manufactured by using 1 kg of soda ash. I find that the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) after analyzing the issue in detail rejected the Revenue s contention that during the aforesaid period, production of goods was suppressed and in turn cleared without payment of duty. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) recorded the findings as below: However, the argument that the input output ratio remained the same during the period merits consideration and was required to be verified. It was for the very purpose I have called for a report from the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner and Commissioner. To the specific question asked whether any subsequent demand was issued, the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner....