Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2013 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (7) TMI 835 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURTWhether the Commissioner having once determined the Annual Capacity of Production, can, on discovery of new and additional evidence/material, which the assessee failed to disclose or suppressed, can redetermine the same? - Assessee provided the information for being assessed on the basis of certificate from manufacturer of the Furnace about the capacity of furnace to be 2.5 MT to 3.0 MT for melting on that basis annual capacity production was determined provisionally on 9600 TCF vide letter dated 29.09.1997 – Held that:- During investigation by Anti-Evasion, a copy of contract under the influence of respondent between the assessee unit and manufacturer was obtained through the Directorate General of the Central Excise Intelligence (erstwhile DGAE ) from the record under their possession. Technical data of this contract revealed the furnace of type ITM - 4/1500 KW was supplied by the manufacturer M/s ABB Limited to the assessee unit which had capacity of 3390 KG, which was further corroborated from the facts mentioned in the statement of Shri J.S . Rao , DGM of manufacturer, Shri Tushar Mewar , Senior Marketing Manager of the manufacturer, statement of Shri Sunil Bansal , Director of the assessee - Second proviso to Section 3A (2) of the Act of 1944 provides that in a case where the factor relevant to the production is altered or modified at any time during the year, the annual production shall be redetermined on a proportionate basis having regard to such alteration or modification. If there is an altertion or modification in any factor relevant to production specificed , such production shall have to be redetermined as held by the Supreme Court in Para 22 of CCE v. Doaba Steel Rolling Mills [2011 (7) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] – Matter remanded to Tribunal.
|