https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442671 The court dismissed the appeal and writ petition, upholding the validity of Rule 8 of the CTUT Rules 2010. It affirmed the duty liability as determined by the respondents and the CESTAT, rejecting the appellant's arguments for a proportionate duty based on actual operation days and claims of Rule 8 being ultra vires to Section 3A and violative of Article 14. The court emphasized the clear language of Rule 8 and its alignment with Section 3A, concluding that the rule is neither ultra vires nor unconstitutional. en-us Wed, 06 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Apr 2024 14:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442671 The court dismissed the appeal and writ petition, upholding the validity of Rule 8 of the CTUT Rules 2010. It affirmed the duty liability as determined by the respondents and the CESTAT, rejecting the appellant's arguments for a proportionate duty based on actual operation days and claims of Rule 8 being ultra vires to Section 3A and violative of Article 14. The court emphasized the clear language of Rule 8 and its alignment with Section 3A, concluding that the rule is neither ultra vires nor unconstitutional. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442671