https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357680 Rule 5 of the Hot Re-Rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 provided that where the capacity worked out under Rule 3 was lower than the mill's actual production for 1996-97, the annual capacity would be deemed equal to that production. The dispute concerned whether this rule applied even after changes in furnace parameters that reduced the reassessed capacity, and whether capacity could instead be fixed by the revised formula. The appeal was ultimately kept pending because the subject matter was stated to be before the Supreme Court in a reference, and the appellant was left free to act after that outcome. en-us Tue, 13 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Mar 2018 07:58:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357680 Rule 5 of the Hot Re-Rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 provided that where the capacity worked out under Rule 3 was lower than the mill's actual production for 1996-97, the annual capacity would be deemed equal to that production. The dispute concerned whether this rule applied even after changes in furnace parameters that reduced the reassessed capacity, and whether capacity could instead be fixed by the revised formula. The appeal was ultimately kept pending because the subject matter was stated to be before the Supreme Court in a reference, and the appellant was left free to act after that outcome. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 13 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357680