COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. VIMAL ALLOYS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition has been filed under Section 35H(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short the Act') seeking a direction to the CEGAT (for short the Tribunal') to refer the following question of law, arising out of final order No. A/422/02/NB (S/M) dated 22-3-2002, for opinion of this Court :

(2.) The respondent-assessee is registered under the Act and was engaged in the manufacturing of non-alloy steel ingots/billets which were chargeable to duty under the Act. With insertion of Section 3A in the Act w.e.f. 1-8-1997, the assessee opted for payment of Excise duty on lump-sump basis. The provision of the Act provided that in case furnace remains closed, the assessee can claim abatement of duty subject to the fulfilment to certain conditions. In the present case the assessee made a claim for abatement for the period 25-1-1998 (8.00 hrs) to 3-2-1998 (10.00 hrs) under Section 3A(3) of the Act read with Rule 96ZO(2) of Central Excise Act Rules, 1944. Out of the above period, the adjudicating authority, vide order dated 24-3-2001, disallowed the abatement claim for the period 25-1- 1998 to 26-1-1998 and directed the assessee to pay the amount of duty involved for the aforesaid period along with interest thereon.

(3.) Aggrieved against the order of adjudicating authority, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Tribunal. Before the Tribunal the stand of the assessee was that at the time of closure of the unit on 25-1-1998 since it was a Sunday and the next day i.e 26-1-1998 was a gazetted holiday being a Republic Day, the assessee intimated the competent authority about the closure of the furnace by way of telegram. Such mode of intimation to the competent authority in case of holidays or Sunday was permissible in terms of Trade Notice 31/99, dated 10-8-1999 issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise Chandigarh-I. These facts have not been dispute.