2005 (9) TMI 208

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent. ORDER [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - This appeal is against an order of the Commissioner of Central Excise rejecting the assessee's abatement claim for the period 16-12-1998 to 29-3-1999 and directing them to pay duty for the said period in terms of the annual capacity of production (ACP) determined under the Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity D....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssee requested for sealing of the stenter vide letter dated 18-12-1998 and informed that they might be allowed to process the goods without using Hot Air Stenter. The assessee however dismantled the stenter even before sealing of the same by the Range Staff and intimated this action vide letter dated 24-12-1998. The assessee dismantled the stenter by removing motor, guide rolls, cloth guider, clot....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essee's claim for abatement of duty for the aforesaid period. He took the view that, as the stenter was removed by the assessee otherwise than in accordance with the procedure laid down in the trade notice, any abatement of duty was not admissible to them. 2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the ACD Rules, under which their ACP was determined by the Commissioner, were struck down by the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....other hand, the date on which the departmental officers visited the factory for sealing the stenter was treated as the last date of non-operation of the stenter. It is submitted by ld. Counsel that the fact that the stenter was not in operation during 16-12-1998 to 29-3-1999 has not been disputed by the Department, nor by the adjudicating authority. Thus, according to ld. Counsel, the Commissioner....