Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2008 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (4) TMI 327 - HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOREWhat is the scope of Rule 3, 4 and 5 of the HRRSMACD Rules, 1997 in case of fixation of annual capacity of production in view of the change of parameters to be effected by the manufacturers? Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that Rule 5 of the HRRSMACD Rules 1997 is not the relevant clause for determination of annual capacity of production where there was a change in the parameters and, that it was only Rule 4 which was relevant rule in determining the annual capacity of production, when Rule 5 does not exclude Ihe cases of re-determination in case of change in parameters by applying Rule 4 of the said Rules? Held that:- No hesitation to answer question no. 1, in favour of the respondent and against the Revenue when change of machinery and parameters, leads to reduction of annual capacity, Rule 5 would not apply, meaning thereby, that Rule 4 of the aforesaid Rules only shall have application to the facts of the case. We have to decide the question no. 2 also in favour of the respondent and against the appellant-revenue. Once the power vested with the Central Government under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act 1944 which enures it to frame Rules has been taken away, by omission of the said Section, it will have no competence or jurisdiction or power to frame Rules.
|