1999 (11) TMI 82

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to dispose of the petitioner's application under Section 3A(4) of the Central Excise Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and also of the attempt of the respondents to force the petitioner to pay excise duty which is not due. 2. We have heard Shri Pankaj Bhatia, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Tej Prakash, learned Counsel for the respondents. 3. The petitioner is engaged in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e the matter afresh after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Thereafter the Commissioner passed an order dated 3-12-1998 taking an entirely different stand i.e. that Section 3A(4) of the Act had no application because the petitioner had opted for payment of duty under Rule 96ZO(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner again went to the Tribunal an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... unsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of as under :- 1. The respondent No. 1 is directed to determine the actual production of the petitioner's unit in compliance with the Tribunal's order dated 13-5-1999 within a period of three months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order before him by the petitioner. 2. Till the re-determination of the actual product .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X