2026 (2) TMI 1337

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....478/2026 & CM APPL. 12479/2026 3. The prayer in the petition reads thus:- "a) Issue an writ, in the nature of certiorari or mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction for holding Rule 16 & 22(3) of the Chewing Tobacco, Jarda Scented Tobacco and Gutkha Packing Machines (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2026, as ultra-vires Section 3A and other applicable provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and also manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable and having no nexus with the object sought to be achieved and therefore violative of Article 14 of the Constitution; b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus declaring that the requirement of disclosure to be made in Form CE DEC-01 Rul....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r relevant to the production of such goods and the quantity that is deemed to be produced by use of a unit of such factor; and (ii) provide for the determination of the annual capacity of production of the factory in which such goods are produced on the basis of such factor by an officer not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise and such annual capacity of production shall be deemed to be the annual production of such goods by such factory: Provided that where a factory producing notified goods is in operation during a part of the year only, the annual production thereof shall be calculated on proportionate basis of the annual capacity of production: Provided further that in a case where the f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the provisions of Rules 16 & 22(3) which provide for contravention of the procedure mandated under Rule 16 are required to be held unconstitutional on account of; a) want of legislative competence and b) the provisions being arbitrary in nature. 8. So as to substantiate the aforesaid contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the plain language employed in Section 3A of the Act, as well as the procedure prescribed under the aforesaid Rules concerning the obligations imposed upon the manufacturer, such as the petitioner, qua the capacity of the manufacturing machines and the duty leviable thereon. According to him, the provisions of Section 3A do not, in any ....