2018 (7) TMI 322

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....chnical) Shri Arnab Chakraborty, Advocate for the Appellant (s) Sri S. Mukhopadhyay, Supdt. (A.R.) for the Respondent (s) ORDER Per Shri Bijay Kumar Being aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant has filed this appeal. 2. Briefly stated the issue involved in this case is regarding availability of Notification No. 33/99-CE dated-08/07/1999 and claiming the refund of Central ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y by 25%. Also, the respondent failed to say so and prove as to how much substantial expansion took place in their factory and since when commercial production and enhanced installed capacity, was commenced. In the order also, the Ld. Commr. (Appeals) has mentioned that the respondent appellant has not submitted the statement of duty paid from the account current by 7th of the next month in which ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ri. - Kolkata), has held that overall increase of 25% in installed capacity is the requirement of Notification Nos. 32/99 and 33/99, and there is no requirement that all the Sections of the manufacturing unit should be individually increased by 25%. Inasmuch as in the present case, going by either of the Certificates, the increase is more than 25%, we are of the view that the benefit of the Notifi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ery wing of the different manufacturing units. We find that the Notification in question talks about the overall increase of 25% in the installed capacity and does not require that each and every section should be upgraded by 25%. In this view of the matter, we do not find any merits in the Revenue's appeals and reject all of them." 5. Further, the Ld. Advocate has also drawn our attention towa....