2002 (5) TMI 152

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r (T)]. - The appellant is engaged in the production of M.S. Cast Bars. They opted for functioning under compounded levy scheme when it came into force in 1997. That is a scheme which permits discharge of duty based on the capacity of production. The appellant's capacity was fixed by the Commissioner at 3.5 MTs. That decision is one of the issues under challenge in the present appeal. The second d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... pointed out that the capacity determination done by the Commissioner was entirely according to the relevant Rules. He referred us in this connection to the following observations in the impugned order. "The procedure for determination of annual capacity of production of Induction furnace was set out in the Induction Furnace Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997. Sub-rule 1 of Rule 3 of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t. In fact not even sub-rule 2 can be resorted to in this situation where the manufacturer/supplier's invoice with complete details is available. The party's contention that physical measurements as given in the Technical expert's report should have been taken to determine the ACP, does not hold any ground in view of the clear cut wordings of the particular rule in question." 3. It is the ld....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....With regard to the second question of the appellant opting out of the compounded levy scheme, there is no dispute that appellant had opted out of the scheme from 25th September, 1997. The submission on this point of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that it is now settled law in terms of Apex Court's decision in the case of Supreme Steel [2001 (133) E.L.T. 513] that an option given is bindi....