https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52297 In a dispute over annual capacity determination under the Hot-Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997, the Tribunal held that Rule 5 governed the initial capacity fixation and that the earlier communication fixing capacity had not been challenged. The argument that the earlier communication was not an order was not accepted for waiver purposes, and financial hardship was not pleaded. Partial pre-deposit was therefore directed, with waiver of the balance pre-deposit and stay of recovery granted only after compliance with the deposit requirement. en-us Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Oct 2010 10:42:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52297 In a dispute over annual capacity determination under the Hot-Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997, the Tribunal held that Rule 5 governed the initial capacity fixation and that the earlier communication fixing capacity had not been challenged. The argument that the earlier communication was not an order was not accepted for waiver purposes, and financial hardship was not pleaded. Partial pre-deposit was therefore directed, with waiver of the balance pre-deposit and stay of recovery granted only after compliance with the deposit requirement. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52297