- (1.) Delay condoned in SLP (C) No. 326 of 2011. Leave granted in the special leave petitions.
(2.) Application for amendment of cause title is allowed in C.A. No. 114 of 2013 @ SLP (C) 570 of 2011. Having heard Learned Counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the issue raised in the present appeals, viz., whether Rule 5 of the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 (for short, the 1997 Rules) would be attracted in a case where a manufacturer proposes to make some change in the installed machinery in terms of Rule 4(2) of the 1997 Rules, is no more res Integra.
(3.) A similar question came up for consideration before this Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh v. Doaba Steel Rolling Mills, 2011 269 ELT 298, wherein it was held that Rule 5 of the 1997 Rules will be attracted for determination of the annual capacity of production of the factory when any change in the installed machinery or any part thereof is intimated to the Commissioner of Central Excise in terms of Rule 4(2) of the 1997 Rules.;