(1.) This is an appeal under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act,1944 against the order dated 9.12.2010 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, East Regional Bench, Kolkata (in short "Tribunal") in Excise Appeal No. EDM-159/2005 insofar as it relates to the Financial Year 1998-99.
(2.) The facts in short are these. The appellant is a company. It is in the business of manufacturing of iron and steel products falling under Chapter 72 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The goods manufactured by the appellant are leviable to excise duty. Section 3 of the Central Excise and Salts Act, 1944 provides for levy of the excise duty on goods manufactured. Section 3A was inserted by the Finance Act, 1997. It provided for payment of excise duty on annual capacity production. And sub-section 2 of Section 3A provided for determination of annual capacity production by framing rules. Accordingly, the Induction Furnace Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 were framed.
(3.) On 1.8.1997, by a notification, Rules 96 ZO and 96 ZP were inserted in the Central Excise Rules, 1944 providing for payment of excise duty @750 per metric ton on capacity production. Sub-rule 3 of Rules 96 ZO and ZP gave an option to the manufacturer like appellant to pay excise duty on lump sum basis. The appellant, therefore, vide its letter dated 10.9.1997, opted to pay excise duty on lump sum basis.