9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 446X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000 to the Commissioner for de novo adjudication after observing the principles of natural justice. Consequently the present order is passed by the ld.Commissioner. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of bars, rods of non-alloys steel falling under chapter 7214.90. Pursuant to the applicability of compounded levy scheme to re-rollers, the appellant had filed a declaration addressed to the Commissioner of Central Excise, Jamshedpur on 21.08.1997 declaring various parameters for determination of annual production capacity of their factory. They have filed another declaration on 26.08.1997 pursuant to the visit and verification by Superintendent on 26.08.1997. The said paramete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 25.09.1997 and the said report was counter-signed by one Shri Bhagirathi Singh on 17.10.1997 indicating that the verification was made in presence of one Shri Sunil Gupta and himself. It is his submission that the said report cannot be accepted and made the sole basis for fixation of annual capacity of production. On a query from the Bench on the earlier date of hearing as to whether any demand has been issued pursuant to the said fixation of annual capacity of production, ld.Advocate had submitted that their factory has been closed since 01.09.1997 and there had been no production from that date which also would be evident from the records that on visiting of the Asstt.Commissioner (Prev.) on 17.10.1997 for joint verification, the roll ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 by the appellant as mentioned in the said report. Also we find that the said report was endorsed by one Shri Bhagirathi Singh on 17.10.1997 indicating that the said verification was conducted in his presence and in the presence of Shri Sunil Gupta. The appellant disputes the said endorsement and the report. The ld.adjudicating authority while accepting the said report has reasoned that the Superintendent perhaps though prepared the report on 25.09.1997 could not get it counter-signed by the representative of the company as on that date assuming that the verification would be carried out later by some senior officers from the department. The ld.Commissioner found that the subsequent endorsement by one Shri Bhagirathi Singh witnessing the v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
