TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 1159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not shut down for a continuous period of seven days and therefore, the appellant does not fall within the meaning of sub-section (3) of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - appeal dismissed. - C.E.A. No. 26 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 1-7-2015 - G. Chandraiah and Challa Kodanda Ram, JJ. JUDGMENT [Judgment per : G. Chandraiah, J.]. - This Central Excise Appeal is filed against the order passed in Appeal No. E/1416/2000 on 5-11-2004 [2005 (191) E.L.T. 737 (Tribunal) by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench at Bangalore. 2. The appellant claimed for abatement of Central Excise Duty relating to their 5 MT furnace in terms of condition (e) under sub-rule (2) of Rule 96ZO. The appellant s fac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel, Sri V. Gopalakrishna Gokhaley, for the respondent-department submitted that the original authority as well as the appellate authority have rightly considering the terms of condition (e) under sub-rule (2) of Rule 96ZO dismissed the claim of the appellant and therefore, no interference of this Court is required. Rule 96ZO(2) refers to : Where a manufacturer does not produce the ingots and billets of non-alloy steel during any continuous period of not less than seven days and wishes to claim abatement under sub-section (3) of section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the abatement will be allowed by an order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise of such amount as may be specified in such order, subject to the fulfilme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excise Act, 1944, the manufacturer suppose not to produce during any continuous period of not less than seven days. 6. As could be seen from the impugned order it is clear that the appellant s furnace had functioned upto 12. hours on 22-10-1999 and from 12.30 hours to 24 hours on 29-10-1999. Therefore, the original authority had rightly excluded both the dates as the furnace had functioned on those days. Excluding those days, it was found that the furnace was not shut down for a continuous period of seven days and therefore, the appellant does not fall within the meaning of sub-section (3) of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 7. Further, from a perusal of the judgment supra reliance placed by the learned counsel for the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
