TMI Blog2008 (5) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... avan, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri A,N. Sharma, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. - Heard both sides. 2. Appellants filed these appeals against the impugned order whereby demand is confirmed and penalties are imposed after denying the benefit of Notification No. 50/2003-C.E., dated 10-6-2003. 3. Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Bars and claimed the benefit of Notification No. 50/2003-C.E. Notification No. 50/2003-C.E., dated 10-6-2003 prescribe following conditions for availment of benefit of exemption contained in the notification "2. The exemption contained in this notification shall apply only to the following kind of units, namely :- (i) new industrial u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment report after expansion and inspection report of Chartered Engineer was also produced to show that installed capacity has been increased more than 25%. The appellants also produced purchase bills in respect of procurement of capital goods which are installed to increase the annual capacity. The appellants have increased length of their furnace from 70 rft. To 120 rft. Power of electric motor of Roughing Stand has been increased from 460 KW to 1250 KW and the gear box reduction ratio has been increased from 1 to 1.4. Other auxiliary motors were also re placed. ACB of 1600 AMP and 2500 AMP were also replaced with that of higher capacity. The Contention of the appellants is that the capacity of their furnace was determined by the Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... increase in installed capacity of 25% or more would not tantamount to substantial expansion. The contention is that the appellants invested Rs. 85 lakhs for expansion of the plant and as per Board's Circular as/their annual capacity has been increased which is more than 25%, by increase in length of furnace and by replacing main drive motor of 460 KW with 1250 KW motor and by installing other capital goods In these circumstances, contention is that as the appellants had under taken substantial expansion by way of increase in their annual capacity more than 25%, therefore, denial of benefit of notification is not sustainable. 5. Revenue relied upon the finding arrived at by the adjudicating authority to submit that as per Chartered Engi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment of quality of existing product unless it leads to increase in capacity of 25% would not tantamount to substantial expansion. As per this clarification modernization or for improving the quality of existing plant will also come under substantial expansion, if it leads to increase in installed capacity by 25% or more. The opinion of Chartered Engineer obtained by the Revenue admitted the increase in capacity by modification of the existing plant and, machinery. The appellants produced the invoices showing purchase of new capital goods which were before the lower authorities also. 8. Case of the Revenue is that the capacity was increase by modification/upgradation in piece meal in the parts of existing plant. We find that there is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
