AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 123
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....manufacture of rolled products of non-alloy steel viz. CTD bars falling under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The appellant was issued with the show-cause notice for the period August, 2001 to December 2005, alleging clandestine manufacture and clearance of goods based on consumption of electricity relying upon the expert opinion of Mr. G.S.Hegde, Chartered Engineer; that is 1000 units of power is required for manufacture of 1 MT of MS ingots and 200 units of power is required for manufacture of 1 MT of CTD bar. Consequently, on the basis of said theoretical power consumption, quantity of goods manufactured and cleared had been arrived at and demand was issued. The said show-cause notice was adjudicated and confirmed. Ano....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....roceeds of such clearances; therefore estimated production based only on electricity consumption as per the expert opinion of Mr. G.S. Hegde cannot be the basis for demand of duty alleging clandestine manufacture and clearance in view of the decision of this Tribunal in their own case and also decision of Principal Bench of this Tribunal in the case of R.A. Castings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Meerut-I [2009(237) ELT 674 (Tri. Del.)]. They have also relied upon the following judgments of this Tribunal where the Tribunal held that clandestine removal cannot be sustained merely on the basis of the technical expert opinion/report: i. Emmtex Synthetics Ltd. Vs. CCE, New Delhi [2003(151) ELT 170 (Tri. Del.)] ii. CCE, Chennai Vs. Dhavavi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re of MS ingots which are captively consumed in the manufacture of CTD bars. Periodical show-cause notices were issued to the appellant on the basis of expert opinion of Mr. G.S. Hegde, Chartered Engineer who opined that 1000 units of power is required to manufacture 1 MT of MS ingots and 200 units of power is required to manufacture 1 MT of CTD bars. On the basis of said unit consumption of electricity, estimated quantity of ingots and CTD bars manufactured during the period has been calculated and on comparison of the said figures with the Statutory Registers maintained for production and clearance, the difference quantity alleged to be removed clandestinely without payment of duty. 8. We find that in the appellant's own case for earli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... time of issue of first show cause notice was that the assessee was indulging in suppression of production and evasion of duty. Duty demand itself was to the tune of Rs. 7.25 crores. In the three Orders-in-Original passed by the Commissioner covering the period 8/2001 to 9/2008, as per the submissions furnished by the revenue, duty confirmed towards clandestine clearances by the assessee is more than Rs. 11 crores. Though, significant quantities were cleared as per these orders subsequent to the search in 2004, revenue has not been able to gather not even an iota of evidence for physical clearance of any quantity of ingots or CTD bars manufactured by the assessee clandestinely. There is no evidence of procurement of any quantity of raw mate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....referred to either by the appellants or the Revenue laying down the norms for the consumption of electricity for the manufacture of one MT of steel ingots : (i) 555 to 1046 (KWH/T) as per Dr. Batra's report; (ii) 1800 KWH/T as per the report by Joint Plant Committee constituted by the Ministry of Steel, Government of India; (iii) 1427 KWH/T as per the report of NISST, Mandi, Gobindgarh given in June-July, 2006; (iv) 650 units to 820 units/MT as per the Executive Director, All India Induction Furnace Association, New Delhi; (v) 851 units/MT in the case of Nagpal Steel v. CCE, Chandigarh reported in 2000 (125) E.L.T. 1147. 21. ... ... ... 22. ... ... ... 23. The Tribunal ....