TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 972X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No.57377 of 2013 - A/54108/2017-EX[DB] - Dated:- 19-6-2017 - Shri S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) And Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate for the appellant Shri R.K. Manjhi, Authorized Representative (DR) for the respondent ORDER Per. B. Ravichandran The appeal is against order dated 31/01/2013 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Sponge Iron liable to Central Excise duty. During the course of audit of the books of accounts of the appellant, the officers noticed that for the period April 2004 to June 2005, the consumption of electricity by the appellant had shown abnormal variation fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation of electricity consumption, but on other evidence like private documents etc. Regarding demand of ₹ 8,89,000/- for the period 2007-2008 the case is pending before the Tribunal and the same relates to bunch of cases booked by the Department against large number of manufacturers. The facts of the said case are relating to one dealer by name M/s Kailash Traders. Based on the records recovered from such traders and some transporters proceedings were initiated against large number of manufacturers of Ingots, Sponge Iron etc. 3. The learned Counsel submitted that neither show cause notice nor the original order gave the basis of calculation of short levy and any corroborative evidence regarding the alleged unaccounted clearance and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reference was made to a case of short levy of ₹ 8,87,000/- during the year 2007-2008, we note that was part of large number of cases booked against various manufacturers based on records recovered from M/s Kailash Traders and transporters. We find that inference based on these two cases, to confirm a huge demand, only on summary calculation of electricity consumption is not legally sustainable. 6. We note that the show cause notice as well as the Original Authority relied on the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in Triveni Ruber and Plastics vs. CCE, Cochin reported in 1994 (73) E.L.T. 7 (S.C.). The Hon ble Supreme Court was dealing with the provisions of the then Rule 173E of Central Excise Rules, 1944 which talks about fixi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ms, if at all, considered by Revenue is based on bigger units of above 300 M.T. per day, whereas the appellants have only capacity of around 50 M.T. per day. The scale of operation is not duly considered by the Original Authority. 8. Having examined the contends of the show cause notice, impugned order and the grounds of appeal, we find that a demand now confirmed by the Original Authority solely based on the purported excess consumption of electricity, without any corroborative evidence cannot be upheld. There is no corroboration of any sort. No investigation has been conducted by Revenue. When audit of accounts were conducted, the officers made certain calculation of possible normal consumption of power. Based on purported excess consu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
