GCR No.5 of 2005 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH GCR No.5 of 2005 DATE OF DECISION: March 19, 2010 M/S PARADISE STEEL ROLLING MILLS ...PETITIONER VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHD. ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. PRESENT: MR. SURJEET BHADU, ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER. MR. SUSHIL GAUTAM, ADVOCATE FOR MR. GURPREET SINGH, SR.STANDING COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL) The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal') has referred the following question of law for adjudication by this Court:- “Whether Rule 5 of the Hot Re-rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997 would apply to a case where annual capacity of production has been re-determined in terms of Rule 4(2) on account of change in parameters even though re-determined annual capacity is less than the actual production for the financial year, 1996-1997?” This question stands squarely answered in favour of the assessee and in favour of the Revenue in Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh-I vs. Doaba Steels Rolling Mills, reported as 2002(139) ELT GCR No.5 of 2005 -2- 285 (P&H) and CEA No.2 of 2009, Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana vs. M/s Surindera Steel Rolling & General Mills, Malerkotla, decided on 19.3.2010. Accordingly, the reference is answered in favour of the assessee in the same terms as in Doaba Steels' case (supra). (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE March 19, 2010 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) Gulati JUDGE