TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 680X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CX - Dated:- 3-12-2009 - Shri D.P. Singh, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri M.K. Srivastava, Addl. Commissioner, for the Department. [Order]. These three revision applications have been filed by Commissioner, Central Excise Daman against orders-in-appeal Nos. KS/134-136/Daman/06 dated 22-6-06 passed by the Commissioner Central Excise, Daman. 2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s. National Wire Industries, Udyog Nagar, Navsari which is an exempted unit is manufacturing wire from wire rods falling under Chapter No. 72. The assessee has filed various rebate claims with the JAC, Central Excise, Valsad. 2.1 On scrutiny of the input Invoice of M/s. Tata Iron Steel Company Ltd., Mumbai, it appeared that the assessee had not carried ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rebate claim filed by the assessee under Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944. 2.4 Being aggrieved with the impugned-order-in-original passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise, Valsad, the respondent filed appeals with the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Daman. The Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Daman vide order-in-appeal No. KS/134 to 136/Daman/06 dated 22-6-06 accepted the appeals on the ground that the assessee has fulfilled the condition of the Notification No. 41/2001-C.E. (N.T.), dated 26-6-01 superseded by Notification No. 21/2004-C.E. (N.T.), dated 6-9-04 by furnishing input-output ratio and regarding allegation made against the assessee that they have not carried out any manufacturing process and th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that they have procured wire rod of 5.5 mm/6.00 mm then sent to wire drawing wherein input invoice of M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd., Mumbai, the galvanized ire was of 2.50 mm. As such the assessee had mis-declared the description and classification of raw material. Therefore the goods on which duty was paid by M/s. TISCO and rebate of which is being sought, were not used for manufacture of finished goods. 4. A Notice under Section 35EE was issued to the respondent M/s. National Wire, who filed their counter reply vide letter dated 23-6-07. Their main arguments are as under : (i) The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was received by the department on 28-6-06. The appeal was preferred in CESTAT on 26-9-06. The Asstt. Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd oblige and order the authority to grant rebate with interest since authority has ignored the order of Commissioner (Appeal), Daman. 5. The case was listed for personal hearing on 29-6-07, 22-5-09 and 12-8-09. Shri M.K. Srivastava, Addl. Commissioner, Daman appeared on behalf of the applicant on 22-5-09 and reiterated the grounds of revision application. Nobody appeared on behalf of the respondent on any of the dates. 6. Govt. has considered oral and written submissions of the applicant, written submissions of the respondent and also perused the orders passed by the lower authorities. 7. Govt. observes that the Commissioner has filed the revision application after the expiry of the stipulated period of 3 months, but requested for co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
