Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2015 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (6) TMI 1021 - HC - Central ExciseClassification - Whether the furnace of the appellant is 'pusher type' or 'batch type' for determination of ACP (annual production capacity) for levying monthly liability - Report of the NISST was given to the assessee in advance. Assessee has not lead any rebuttal evidence in the form of any Chartered Engineer's Certificate - Primary authority has not only taken the report of the NISST, but also examined the annual production based on the declarations filed by the assessee itself and the claim of the assessee with regard to the nature of mill being run by it - Held that:- the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that the mill is low speed mill and the authorities treating it as high speed mill, fixed higher annual production capacity and demanded higher duty, cannot be countenanced. The questions of law framed for consideration form part of questions of fact, on which the primary authority has categorically recorded finding based on report of the technical committee and the same has been concurred by the appellate Tribunal and on re-appreciation of the entire material on record, we do not find any legal infirmity or irregularity to interfere with the same. - Decided against the appellant
|