TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 954X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch the declaration regarding the number of machines has not been filed) the manufacturer will be liable to pay duty on the entire production. However, Revenue has failed to undertake any serious investigation to establish the manufacture, if any of the stainless steel patta/pattis under the circumstances, I have no option but to set aside the demands and allow the appeals - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No. 1187 and 1227 of 2011 (SM) - Order No. A/53747-53748/2016-SM[BR] - Dated:- 20-9-2016 - Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Appellant By: Ms. Seema Jain, Advocate Respondent By: Shri N. Nunthuk, Authorized Representative (DR) ORDER Per. V. Padmanabhan : The two ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manufacture took place in the factories. Even though they have applied to the Revenue Authorities for grant of permission under the compounded levy scheme, since they have not manufactured any stainless steel patta/pattis, no duty liability will rise against them. The learned DR on the other hand submits that since the manufacturers have been granted the permission on the basis of their application for undertaking manufacture and clearance of stainless steel patta/pattis under the compounded levy scheme, the duty liability will rise from that day and since the appellants have failed to discharge the same the duty demands are in order. 3. I have heard Ms. Seema Jain, learned Advocate for the appellant as well as Shri N. Nunthuk, learned D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itting an application indicating the number of machines proposed to be used alongwith the duty payable thereon. The consequence of failure to comply with step two above, in terms of the notification, would be that they will be disentitled to avail the concessional rate available under the compounded levy scheme and will be required to discharge duty on the stainless steel patta/pattis manufactured and cleared at rates prescribed for such goods in the 1 ST Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act. In the present case the contention of the appellant is that manufacture was never undertaken in the two factories. Hence, even though the declaration about the number of machines was not complied with, no excise duty will be payable by them in as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
