MEENAKSHI STEEL RE-ROLLING MILLS REP. BY ITS PARTNER SHRI MOHANLAL JINDAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE I, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ASSISTANT-COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE writ appeals are directed against the common order dated 7.12.2005 passed by learned Single Judge in a group of writ petitions bearing W.P. Nos. 6682 -84/2002 and connected writ petitions, whereby all the petitions were dismissed. The present appeals are filed by the petitioners in W.P. No. 6682/2002. It is not clear whether the petitioners in other writ petitions filed any appeal challenging the order dismissing their petitions vide order dated 7.12.2005.

(2.) THE appellants in their writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India sought declaration that Rule 5 of the Hot Re -rolling Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 (for short the "Rules") is illegal, ultra vires and unenforceable. The appellants, in the writ petition, also prayed for a direction to the respondents not to give effect to Rule 5 of the Rules and to determine the annual production capacity of the appellants -Company under the provisions of the Rule 3(3) without reference to Rule 5 of the Rules and collect excise duty based on such determination for the period between 1.9.1997 and 31.3.2000. They also sought direction to the respondents to refund with interest the excess amount of excise duty paid by them.

(3.) IT would be necessary to state the facts to the extent that are necessary to address the question raised in the appeals. The first appellant, hereinafter called as company, is a Company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956. The second appellant, at the relevant time, was Chairman and Managing Director of the company. The relevant assessment years for our purpose are 1996 -97 to 1999 -2000. The Company was engaged in the business of manufacturing steel products including steel rolled products.