In Brief
Bhuwalka Steel Industries challenged the constitutionality of Central Excise Rule 96-ZP(3), arguing it violated Article 14 by permitting duty assessment without actual production as required by the Act. The Supreme Court found the reference question improperly framed—it did not arise from the assessee's dispute or the facts at hand. Given the constitutional dimension and that prior related decisions came from a three-judge Bench, the Court remitted the matter to a Division Bench for proper consideration of the correctly formulated legal issues concerning the rule's validity and its relationship to statutory production requirements.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.