SHRADHA STEELS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.

(2.) THE appellants M/s. Shradha Steels is a manufacturer of M.S. Bar falling under Chapter Sub Heading No. 7214.90 and MS ingots falling under Chapter Sub Heading 7206.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Show cause notice was issued to the appellants proposing to levy of penalty and interest amount as the appellants failed to deposit the duty amount within the scheduled time fixed on the basis of annual capacity of production. On due adjudication of the matter, it is found that the appellant was working under compounded levy scheme as per the Section 3A of the Central Excise Act 1944 and failed to discharge the duty liability as specified by the Commissioner of Central Excise Aurangabad under Rule 96ZP(3)/96ZO of Central Excise Rules, 1944. It appears that all the manufacturers of M.S. Bars and Ingots have challenged the Notification fixing the duty liability under the ACP before the Supreme Court. Ultimately, the Supreme Court of India, upheld the validity of the Notification in favour of the department. The Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise and Customs has disposed off the cases on different assesses including the appellant by a common order -in -original, wherein the penalty amount and interest were confirmed as proposed under Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules. The appellant has preferred the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), Aurangabad, who in turn has confirmed the same. Hence the present appeal.

(3.) LD . Counsel for the appellants put forth the following contentions: