<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2005 (12) TMI 113 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA  AT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47831</link>
    <description>Rule 5 of the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997, treats actual production in the base year as annual capacity where formula-based capacity is lower. Section 3A of the Central Excise Act delegated the method for determining annual production capacity to subordinate rules, allowing this revenue-protective adjustment. The rule was upheld as intra vires because it advanced the statutory levy scheme and did not exceed delegated authority. Its differential impact did not violate Article 14: fiscal measures permit broad classification where a rational nexus exists with preventing revenue leakage and ensuring proper duty collection. Objections based on res judicata and estoppel were also rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 11:15:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=86347" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (12) TMI 113 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA  AT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47831</link>
      <description>Rule 5 of the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997, treats actual production in the base year as annual capacity where formula-based capacity is lower. Section 3A of the Central Excise Act delegated the method for determining annual production capacity to subordinate rules, allowing this revenue-protective adjustment. The rule was upheld as intra vires because it advanced the statutory levy scheme and did not exceed delegated authority. Its differential impact did not violate Article 14: fiscal measures permit broad classification where a rational nexus exists with preventing revenue leakage and ensuring proper duty collection. Objections based on res judicata and estoppel were also rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47831</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>