https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263534 Rule 5 of the Hot Re-rolling Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 was upheld as a valid measure supporting the Section 3A excise scheme. The classification under the rule was found to have a rational nexus with the object of the levy, and the provision allowing reassessment on proof of actual lower production addressed the discrimination objection. In view of the earlier approval of the same challenge, the rule was held neither violative of Article 14 nor ultra vires Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the challenge failed. en-us Tue, 17 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Oct 2015 10:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263534 Rule 5 of the Hot Re-rolling Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 was upheld as a valid measure supporting the Section 3A excise scheme. The classification under the rule was found to have a rational nexus with the object of the levy, and the provision allowing reassessment on proof of actual lower production addressed the discrimination objection. In view of the earlier approval of the same challenge, the rule was held neither violative of Article 14 nor ultra vires Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263534