TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 674
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounded levy scheme, read with Induction Furnace Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as Induction Rules). The appellants had two furnaces, one connected to HT SC 1501 and another one to HT SC 1570. Annual Capacity of Production (ACP) vide Rule 3 of the said Induction Rules was fixed for the appellants vide communication dated 30.09.1997 as under: (i) Total installed capacity of both furnaces fixed as 8 MTs (ii) Annual capacity of production fixed as 25,600 MTs 2. Abatement for closure of the furnace/s had been sought by the appellants on various occasions. Further, in respect of the furnace [1570], it appears that the same had broken down on 6.3.1998 due to a major fire, the fact of which had been intimate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aking into consideration submissions made by the appellants. In denovo adjudication, the Commissioner vide impugned order No. 08/2005 dated 24.05.2005 recalculated the liability and quantum of abatement in para 12.2 of the order and confirmed total installed capacity as 8 MTs from 01.09.1997 to 11.09.1998, redetermination of total installed capacity as 4 MTs and ACP as 12,800 MT from 12.09.1998 to 31.03.2000. After taking into account the annual capacity of production and total installed capacity, the adjudicating authority has demanded differential duty of Rs. 35,66,107/- along with interest liability thereof. Equal penalty under Rule 96 ZO (3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 has also been imposed. The appellants have once again preferre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dered abatement for 12 days. Ld. Advocate submits that the appellants are however not contesting the issue on abatements and are only praying for pro-rata fixation of duty liability for the period from 06.03.1998 to 15.07.1998 and re-fixation of ACP and duty liability w.e.f. 15.08.1998. 6. On the other hand ld. AR supports the adjudication. 7. Heard both sides and have gone through the records. 8.1 The issues that remains for decision in this appeal are concerning the eligibility of pro-rata duty liability and the effective date for revised ACP. The adjudicating authority in the impugned order has re-determined the ACP only from 12.09.1998 and has denied pro-rata duty liability benefit for earlier period. 8.2 It is seen that the said au....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....which was totally non-functional and closed to levy excise duty on production that never came into existence. Viewed in this light, we find the denial of re-fixation of ACP w.e.f. 15.08.1998 as unreasonable and unsustainable, for which reason that part of the order is set aside. So ordered. Competent authority shall accordingly refix the ACP for the impugned period accordingly and communicate the same to the appellant. 8.4 In respect of the prayer for pro-rata fixation of duty liability, we find from various communications and intimations that it is a fact that the second furnace [1570] had been out of service and non-functional from 06.03.1998 to 15.07.1998, which has also been acknowledged by the Commissioner in para 11.3.4 of the impugn....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Central Excise Act can come to the aid of the Revenue in cases like these has been laid down by this Court in Hans Steel Rolling Mill v. CCE, (2011) 3 SCC 748 = 2011 (265) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.) as follows : 13. On going through the records it is clearly established that the appellants are availing the facilities under the compound levy scheme, which they themselves opted for and filed declarations furnishing details about the annual capacity of production and duty payable on such capacity of production. It has to be taken into consideration that the compounded levy scheme for collection of duty based on annual capacity of production under Section 3 of the Act and the 1997 Rules is a separate scheme from the normal scheme for collection o....