TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appeals were to be remanded for fresh adjudication with an opportunity of hearing on the questions of natural justice, determination of annual capacity of production, abatement, and the applicability of the governing decisions on levy under section 3A.
Analysis: The appeals were disposed of by a common order on the basis that liability under section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was determinable and that the parties agreed to have the disputes re-examined by the adjudicating authority. The order recorded that where violations of natural justice were alleged, where annual capacity of production had not been properly determined, where abatement had not been granted, and where the procedure under the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 had not been followed, the matters required relook. It further directed that the adjudicating authority afford a fair opportunity of hearing, not entertain fresh evidence, determine annual capacity on the record, allow abatement wherever permissible, and be guided by the relevant judicial pronouncements and the challenge pending in the High Court concerning Rule 5.
Conclusion: The appeals were remanded to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration in accordance with law and with the specified directions.
TaxTMI 
