DURGA STEEL ROLLING MILLS Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals are directed against order in appeal dated 25.8.04 which upheld the order in original that confirmed the demand and imposed penalties on the appellants. Since all these appeals are arising out of the same order in appeal, they are disposed of by this common order.

(2.) THE issue involved in these cases is regarding the demand of duty confirmed on the appellants in respect of the duty liability arising out of the annual capacity of production determined under Rule 96 -ZP(3) of Central Excise Rules for the month of December, 1999 to February, 2000. The appellants did not discharge the duty liability for three months. Show cause notice was issued to the appellants in terms of Section 11 -A read with Section 96 -ZP(3) proposing for demand and confirmation of duty and for imposition of penalties. The adjudicating authority confirmed show cause notice by different orders in original and also imposed penalty. On an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) also concurred with the findings of the adjudicating authority.

(3.) DESPITE issue of notices, the appellant is not present and nor is represented by anybody. There is also no request for adjournment. Since the matter is on board from 24.7.2006, I take up these appeals in the absence of the appellants.