SUVARNA PROCESSORS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue in dispute in the present appeal relates to the inclusion of the length of galleries while determining the length of the chambers of hot air stenter for the purpose of determining duty liability under Rule 96ZQ of the Central Excise Rules read with Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processors Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1998. The adjudicating authority has determined the annual capacity of production as Rs. 1359.99 lakhs and number of chambers in the factory of the appellant who is an independent processor as 9.67 chambers and held that the rate of duty applicable is Rs. 1.50 lakhs per month/chamber. The contention of the appellant is that the length of gallary is not required to be included in the hot air stenter. The appellants' contention is based upon the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of Sangam Processors Bhilwara Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur [2001(127) E.L.T.679.] Following the ratio of the above decision, which is directly applicable to the present case, we set aside the order passed by the Commissioner and allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any due to the appellant. (Dictated in Court)