https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198177 Where annual capacity of a hot re-rolling steel mill is refixed after permission to change machinery and declaration of revised technical parameters, the applicable method is Rule 4(2) of the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997, not Rule 5 based on the previous year's production. The Tribunal treated the earlier coordinate bench view in Awadh Alloys as binding and held that a departmental letter could not override that judicial interpretation. It also noted that an order under Section 3A(2) of the Central Excise Act remains appealable even if described as provisional. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh consideration under the correct legal position. en-us Wed, 16 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Jan 2018 17:38:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198177 Where annual capacity of a hot re-rolling steel mill is refixed after permission to change machinery and declaration of revised technical parameters, the applicable method is Rule 4(2) of the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997, not Rule 5 based on the previous year's production. The Tribunal treated the earlier coordinate bench view in Awadh Alloys as binding and held that a departmental letter could not override that judicial interpretation. It also noted that an order under Section 3A(2) of the Central Excise Act remains appealable even if described as provisional. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh consideration under the correct legal position. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 16 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198177