https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115071 Duty demand under the compounded levy scheme could not be sustained because annual capacity of production had not been determined by a valid quasi-judicial order of the Commissioner and served on the manufacturer. A communication issued by an Assistant Commissioner, even if referring to an alleged determination, did not satisfy Rule 4 of the Hot- Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 and could not support demand under Rule 96ZP of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The demand and appellate dismissal founded on such communications were therefore set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh determination and consequential quantification in accordance with law and natural justice. en-us Tue, 01 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 May 2012 15:31:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115071 Duty demand under the compounded levy scheme could not be sustained because annual capacity of production had not been determined by a valid quasi-judicial order of the Commissioner and served on the manufacturer. A communication issued by an Assistant Commissioner, even if referring to an alleged determination, did not satisfy Rule 4 of the Hot- Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 and could not support demand under Rule 96ZP of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The demand and appellate dismissal founded on such communications were therefore set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh determination and consequential quantification in accordance with law and natural justice. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 01 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115071