9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 1028X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... KURESHI) 1. Revenue has challenged a judgment of the tribunal dated 25.2.2004 by which the tribunal allowed the appeal of respondent assessee following the decision of Madras High Court in case of Beauty Dyers v. Union of India reported in 2002 (52) RLT 636(Mad.), holding the notification by which annual capacity determination rules have been framed as ultra vires Section 3A of the Central Excis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... troversy. We therefore, reframe the question for consideration in the present appeal as follows : "Whether CEGAT was correct in allowing the appeal of respondent assessee following judgement of Madras High Court in case of Beauty Dyers v. Union of India reported in 2002 (52) RLT 636(Mad.) and holding that Rule 3 of the Hot Air Ste ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngly, the assessee was charged by the department authority. However, the tribunal by following decision of Madras High Court holding such rules ultra vires, reversed the orders of the revenue authority. Counsel pointed out that Division Bench of this Court in case of Messers Gopal Iron & Steel, Co. (Gujarat) Ltd. & anr. in Special Civil Application No.8387/2003 and connected matters by judg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cturer by providing that on less production/manufacture, he would be entitled to refund and the Supreme Court says that Section3A is relatable to the production and not the capacity only, then, it would not be proper to say that Section3A is ultra vires the Constitution. We would agree with the learned Counsel that excise can be levied on the production and/or manufacture and not otherwise, but, S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
