2006 (2) TMI 521

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member, (J) (Oral)]. -  All these appeals are same and hence they are taken up together for disposal as per law. E/91 & 92/2006 As the issue is covered by large number of judgments, therefore the stay and appeals are taken up together for disposal. Both these appeals arise from Order-in-Appeal No. 04/2005, dated 20-10-2005 by which the Co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(161) E.L.T. 285 and Karnataka High Court judgment rendered in the case of CCE, Mangalore v. Shree Krishna Pipes Industries reported in 2004 (165) E.L.T. 508 (Kar.) = 2004 (113) ECR 718 (HC - Kar.). Besides these three judgments, the assessee has also brought to his notice three more rulings and larger bench rulings of the Tribunal setting aside the imposition of penalty under Section 11AC of CE ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that the issue pertaining to non-levy of penalties instances where duty has been paid before the issue of show cause notice has reached finality by the Apex Court confirming the Tribunal ruling rendered in the case of Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. (supra). He submits that if any judgment has been passed by any High Court or a Tribunal which is not in consonance with the Apex Court judgment then it w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urt, High Court and Larger Bench of Tribunal in terms of the findings given by the Commissioner (A) and also by Bombay Bench judgment rendered in the case of M/s. Saheli Synthetics Pvt Ltd. & Ors. v. CC, Kandla vide Final Order No. A/681-683/WZB/05-C-II, dated 19-7-2005 [2006 (197) E.L.T. 337 (Tribunal)]. He prayed for upholding the orders of the Commissioner (A) in imposing penalty. 5. On a....