ORDER
S.S. Sekhon, Member (T)
1. After hearing the matter for some time it transpires that the appeal itself it could be decided. After waiver of pre-deposit, the appeal is itself taken up for disposal.
2. Appellant was availing SSI exemption notification benefit. They were visited with a demand of Rs. 6,59,021/- for the period 1-4-2002 to 7-9-2002 on the ground that they had not complied with the provision of para 2(1) of Notification No. 9/2002, dated 1-3-2002 inasmuch as they filed to file a declaration to avail the concessional rate of duty @ 9.6%. They had however filed a letter on 1-4-2002 stating that since there is no change in rate of duty they are not filing separate declaration under Rule 173B.
3. We do not approve the finding of CCE(A) to the effect, “It is not the duty of the department to fish out all the information from the sea of records available with them”. The department has to establish the duty demand. If the entitlement for exemption is otherwise available and intent to continue the availment is exhibited in writing the provision of the notification are met. We also find that the reliance of the Id Advocate on the case of Desai Hydraulics (P) Ltd. – 2003 (160) E.L.T. 706 and Precision Dies & Punching – 2003 (160) E.L.T. 412 is well founded to call for the setting aside the order of duty demand, penalty & interest and allow the appeal.
4. Ordered accordingly.