2018 (1) TMI 1204

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o October, 2015. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of sponge iron falling under sub-heading 7203 1000 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant was filing ER-I returns on monthly basis as required under the rules. In addition ER-7 returns were also being filed by the appellant on annual basis declaring the Annual Installed Capacity as required under Rule 12(2) A of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. After scrutiny of the annual returns along with the ER-I returns for the corresponding period, Revenue came to the conclusion that the appellant did not declare the entire quantity of finished goods manufactured in their factory. It was alleged by the Revenue that the goods have been manufactured by the appellant in quantities as ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xcise Act was not in operation for the goods manufactured by the appellant, during the period of dispute. Finally, he also alleged that the demand for duty is time barred. 5. Ld. DR for the Revenue justified the impugned order. He submitted that in terms of the return ER-7, prescribed under Rule 12(2)A of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, the appellant is required to be declared the annual installed capacity in the subsequent year. The appellant themselves have declared the capacity to be 60,000 MT for the periods under consideration, where as they had the capacity to manufacture upto 72,000 MT per year. Hence, he justified the demand which has been made only on the basis of the capacity of production declared by them. 6. After hearing ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eration which has curtailed their production capacity. Some of the reasons cited are; a) Non-availability of raw materials i.e. Iron Ore as well as Coal. b) Shut down of kiln for maintenance purpose resulting in stoppage of production. c) High cost of raw materials and increase of overhead expenses. d) Adverse market conditions and low demand of finished goods. The appellant has further argued that no investigation has been carried out by the department to establish clandestine clearance, but a huge demand of duty has been made against the appellant, which is not justified. It has further been argued that the appellant has intimated from time to time the department regarding the shut down of the manufa....