9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (5) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 units which have commenced commercial production on or after the 7th day of January, 2003, but not later than the 31st day of March, 2007; (ii) industrial units existing before the 7th day of January, 2003, but which have undertaken substantial expansion by way of increase in installed capacity by not less than twenty-five per cent on or after the 7th day of January, 2003, but have commenced commercial produc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 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 Commissioner of Central Excise by 21913 MTs, when the appellants were paying duty under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act (Compounded Levy Scheme) and with the increase in length in furnace and other changes such in the gear box and installation of motor of higher power, as per the formula under which annual capacity was fixed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the annual capacity comes to 30012 MTs, which is more than 25 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 Engineer's certificate produced by the appellants modification/upgradation has been done in piece meal only in the parts of existing unit which does not cover substantial expansion by way of installing additional machinery. Contention is that as only old plant and machinery has been upgraded by way of replacement to increase capacity of plant and machinery and no additional plant and machinery has been installed to increase ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 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 nothing in the notification to suggest that there should be an increase in each and every unit of the plant. Condition of the notification is overall increase of 25% capacity of production. As we find that as per opinion obtained by the Revenue from Chartered Engineer annual capacity production has been enhanced more than 25% and as per Circular dated 21-1-2004 even modernization or improving quality of existing product which leads ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
