Judgment

Brijesh Kumar, J.—The above noted bunch of cases, comprising of civil appeals, SLPs and writ petitions relate to charge of excise duty on notified goods on the basis of capacity of production, as introduced by newly added Section 3A in the Central Excise Act 1944, by means of Finance Act 26 of 1997. Vires of Rule 96ZO of the Central Excise Rules has also been challenged on the ground that it is inconsistent with the provisions of the Act. In pursuance of the above noted provisions certain notifications were also issued by the Central Government, their validity is also under challenge. A number of writ petitions had been filed in the Delhi High Court as well and in some of them orders of interim relief, dated 28.10.1997 had been passed giving rise to filing of the appeals by the Union of India in this Court.

2. Learned counsel for the parties informed that now the matter remains confined to a period of three years only as the scheme so introduced, has since been dropped. Shri Joseph Vellapally and the other learned counsels appearing on behalf of the manufacturers have stated that they do not challenge the validity of Section 3A, introduced in Central Excise Act 1944. On the