2026-VIL-905-CESTAT-KOL-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise - Actual production determination; Admissibility of statutory documents – Appellant, manufacturer of M.S. Ingots, opted to pay duty on actual production and clearance instead of Annual Capacity of Production – Denial of claim for determination of actual production on the ground that the manufacturer could not produce RT-12 Returns and RG-1 Register - Whether the demand of central excise duty can be confirmed on the ground that the manufacturer failed to produce RT-12 Returns and RG-1 Register when the Department itself has these statutory documents on record and the manufacturer had submitted detailed information regarding actual production and clearances - HELD – The adjudicating authority failed to provide any finding regarding the correctness of the actual production figures submitted by the manufacturer. There exists no contrary finding establishing that the information furnished regarding actual production was false or incorrect. The Tribunal observes that the details of actual production and clearances during the disputed period have been reflected in the statement placed on record and remain undisputed by the adjudicating authority. These figures could have been easily verified from the statutory records, RT-12 Returns and Challans, which are statutory documents available with the department itself. Therefore, there exists no justification for the adjudicating authority insisting on re-submission of these statutory documents by the manufacturer. The evidence on record clearly indicates that the manufacturer had already paid duty on the basis of actual production and clearances during the relevant period. Consequently, there exists no further duty liability to be borne by the manufacturer – The demand of central excise duty confirmed by the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page