https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113521 A declaration striking down one capacity-determination rule did not automatically invalidate a separate rule framed under the same statutory provision. The earlier High Court ruling concerned the Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processor Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1998, whereas the present dispute involved the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 issued under a different notification. Because no High Court or the Supreme Court had held the 1997 Rules ultra vires, the earlier decision could not be applied to sustain the setting aside of the demand. The matter was required to be reconsidered on merits in compliance with natural justice, and the order setting aside the adjudication was not sustained; the case was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals). en-us Tue, 01 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 May 2012 16:39:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113521 A declaration striking down one capacity-determination rule did not automatically invalidate a separate rule framed under the same statutory provision. The earlier High Court ruling concerned the Hot Air Stenter Independent Textile Processor Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1998, whereas the present dispute involved the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 issued under a different notification. Because no High Court or the Supreme Court had held the 1997 Rules ultra vires, the earlier decision could not be applied to sustain the setting aside of the demand. The matter was required to be reconsidered on merits in compliance with natural justice, and the order setting aside the adjudication was not sustained; the case was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals). Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 01 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113521