https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210144 The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing the Revenue's appeals as unsustainable. The case involved disputes over the determination of stenters and chambers, compounded levy discrepancies, and the validity of Notification No.42/98-CE(NT) in relation to Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The High Court found the notification rules inadequate for assessing production capacity for excise duty, deeming them ultra vires Section 3A. en-us Wed, 27 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Nov 2012 12:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210144 The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing the Revenue's appeals as unsustainable. The case involved disputes over the determination of stenters and chambers, compounded levy discrepancies, and the validity of Notification No.42/98-CE(NT) in relation to Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The High Court found the notification rules inadequate for assessing production capacity for excise duty, deeming them ultra vires Section 3A. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210144