Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (10) TMI 385 - AT - Central ExciseArea based exemption - Notification No. 50/2003-CE requires increase in installed capacity by not less than 25% to grant exemption - various documents like certificate of Chartered Engineer, Capacity Certificate by the General Manager, DIC Kotdwar, details of procurement of capital goods etc. deposited by appellant in support of their claim - whether denial of exemption justified? - Held that: - the appellants are in regular communication with the department regarding their claim for exemption under the said Notification. As could be seen from the findings of the original authority, various doubts and suspicion have been raised against some of the documents and certificate submitted by the appellant. It is noted that the appellants have explained their position vis-a-vis these doubts. The appellant originally had capacity of 3 MT which was increased to 4 MT in the second stage of upgradation and overhauling. The appellants claimed to have changed the rating of solid state generator from 2000 KW to 2500 KW various other changes were made to increase the cooling of the assess generator. The furnace crucible capacity was increased 4 MT to 5 MT. The changes were carried out only in one crucible. These things have been explained by M/s Electrotherm (India) Limited who carried out the said upgradation work. The department did make reference to M/s Electrotherm, who confirmed the said expansion and supplied the supporting invoice for the same. The Chartered Engineer appointed by the department appeared before the Tribunal who confirmed that the revised capacity of the appellant as 5.8 MT. The proceedings by the department and the impugned orders heavily relied on certain suspicion and doubts raised against the claims by the appellant without due counter verification to categorically establish the correct expanded capacity by the Revenue - the denial of exemption is not justified - appellant's claim of expanded capacity cannot be rejected on perusal of documents placed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|