Authenticated invoice controls annual capacity fixation; later actual production verification cannot reopen the determination absent express power.

Annual capacity under the induction furnace scheme is to be fixed as a deemed or estimated capacity on the basis of the authenticated invoice, and the prescribed rules require the authority to act on that invoice first. If a valid invoice is available and has already been used for initial fixation, the Department cannot reopen the determination suo motu by relying on later actual production verification unless the statute or rules expressly confer such review power. On this prima facie view, the applicants were entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery, with interim protection granted pending hearing on merits.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the applicants had made out a prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in a proceeding concerning annual capacity fixation of an induction furnace. (ii) Whether the Department could re-determine the annual capacity on the basis of subsequent actual production verification after the capacity had already been fixed on the basis of the authenticated invoice under the prescribed rules.

Issue (i): Whether the applicants had made out a prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in a proceeding concerning annual capacity fixation of an induction furnace.

Analysis: The annual capacity under the statutory scheme is a deemed or estimated capacity, not actual production capacity. The invoice supplied by the manufacturer had already been called for and considered, with technical assistance, before the initial capacity was fixed. On a prima facie view, the applicants had complied with the rule requiring production of the authenticated invoice, and the Department had not established any legal basis for insisting on pre-deposit pending appeal.

Conclusion: The applicants were entitled to full waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.

Issue (ii): Whether the Department could re-determine the annual capacity on the basis of subsequent actual production verification after the capacity had already been fixed on the basis of the authenticated invoice under the prescribed rules.

Analysis: Under the capacity-determination rules, the Commissioner must first call for and act on the authenticated invoice. Resort to the alternative method is contemplated only where a valid invoice is not available. After the initial fixation on the basis of the invoice, the rules did not disclose any power for the Department to reopen the determination suo motu merely by conducting actual production trials and relying on those results to upset the earlier order. Rule 4 did not authorise such a review on the facts of the case.

Conclusion: The Department was not shown to have authority to re-determine the annual capacity in the manner adopted.

Final Conclusion: Full interim protection was granted to the applicants, and the appeal was directed to be heard early on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory scheme requires capacity to be fixed on the basis of an authenticated invoice, the authority cannot reopen that determination suo motu by resorting to actual production verification unless the statute or rules expressly confer such review power.

---