(1.) THE appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Cement and Clinkers falling under Chapter 25 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They manufactured and cleared Cement out of the Clinkers manufactured by them as well as procured from M/s. Rajashree Cements during the period from February 1992 to July, 1992 by availing concessional rate of duty as provided under Notification No. 24/91 dated 25.7.1991 as amended. Under his Order -in -Original No. 111/2000, dated 30.11.2000, the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise held that they are not eligible for this exemption for the cement manufactured from the clinkers procured from M/s. Rajashree Cements, and demanded differential duty of Rs. 7,74,983/ -. The appeal filed by them against the order of the Deputy Commissioner was rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals), Mangalore, under Order -in -Appeal No. 33/2003 -CE dated 26.2.2003.
(2.) SHRI H. S. Srinivas, Advocate appeared for the appellants and Shri L. Narasimha Murthy, JDR, appeared for Revenue.
(3.) SHRI L. Narasimha Murthy, learned JDR for the Revenue pleaded that the issue involved in this appeal has already been settled by the Order of CEGAT, in the case of Shankar Cements Company, Ghaziabad, reported in and the appeal filed by the appellants in the Supreme Court against the Order of CEGAT, wherein they confirmed that "since the Cement manufactured by the Appellant was not made by use of shaft kiln (for production of clinker) in the factory, the condition stipulated under Sl. No. 1 of the table incorporated in Notification No. 24/91 -CE as amended by Notification No. 8/92 -CE is not fulfilled and as such the benefit of exemption would not be available during the relevant period" was upheld by the Supreme Court as reported in . He, therefore, pleaded that the appeal may be dismissed.