- (1.)Delay condoned. Leave granted.
(2.)After arguing for some time, learned senior Counsel for the parties agree that the High Court ought to have considered the legality and constitutionality of Rule 5 of the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 (for short, "1997 Rules") as the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh v. Doaba Steel Rolling Mills,2010 14 SCC 751, has no application in the present situation. They submit that in Doaba Steel Rolling Mills' case the legality and constitutional validity of Rule 5 of 1997 Rules was not put in issue.
(3.)Learned Counsel are right in their submission as the judgment of this Court in Doaba Steel Rolling Mills (para 20 of the report at page 758) clarifies as under:
"Before addressing the contentions advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties, it is essential to note at the outset that in all these appeals, there is no challenge to the validity of Rule 5 of the 1997 Rules inserted vide Notification dated 30-8-1997 and, therefore, we are only required to interpret it and examine the width of its application."