9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 3A of the Central Excise Act. The levy of duty is determined based on the annual capacity of production of the unit, which is to be calculated based on the parameters of the machineries installed in the unit and as per the formula or method prescribed under the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997. 3. It has been further stated that the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, by his proceedings, dated 29-8-97, had informed the petitioner that the Commissioner of Central Excise had provisionally fixed the annual capacity of production of the petitioner Company at 14091 metric tonnes. By his proceedings, dated 12-9-97, it was once again; provisionally fixed at 14187.978 metric tonnes, subject to verificat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner, had passed the impugned order, dated 21-10-2002, directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/-. In such circumstances, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. A Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the second and third respondents, denying the averments made by the petitioner. 6. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the demand for payment of excise duty has been made without finally assessing the production of the petitioner Company, by the competent authority, after giving an opportunity to the petitioner Company to put forth its case and based on the verification of the parameters of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry manner. Just because a second view is possible on the set of facts presented to the Tribunal, on the question of waiver of pre-deposit, may not by itself be sufficient for the Writ Court to step in and modify or reverse the order passed by the Tribunal. 10. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondents and taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that this Court had granted an interim order of stay against the impugned of the first respondent, dated 21-10-2002, which has been continuing till date, this Court is of the considered view that ends of justice would be met to direct the first respondent Tribunal, to dispose of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
