Corrected expert opinion on mill diameter required fresh capacity determination and reconsideration of the assessment.

The annual production capacity of a hot-rolling mill required fresh determination because the corrected expert opinion re-fixed the mill diameter parameter at 258 mm, which directly affected the capacity computation. An assessment based on the earlier value could not stand once the later communication from the same institute supplied a revised technical basis. The matter was therefore required to be reconsidered after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard, and the capacity determination was set aside for fresh decision in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the annual production capacity of the hot-rolling mill required re-determination on account of the correct value of the mill diameter parameter (d) and the reliance placed on the expert opinion.

Analysis: The impugned determination was founded on an earlier expert opinion, but the subsequent letter from the same institute expressly re-determined the value of d at 258 mm. Since the corrected expert opinion had a direct bearing on computation of annual production capacity, the assessment based on the earlier value could not be sustained without reconsideration. The matter therefore required fresh examination after giving the appellant an opportunity of being heard.

Conclusion: The determination of annual production capacity was set aside for reconsideration and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner for fresh decision in accordance with law.

---