2007 (3) TMI 519

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J) ]. -  The dispute in the present appeal relates to imposition of personal penalty of Rs. 4,60,000/- (Rupees four lakhs sixty thousand only) imposed on the appellant and confirmation of interest. The appellant is a undertaking owned, controlled and managed by and constituted under Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1988. They are engaged in the manu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Tribunal in support of his submission that where duty stands deposited before the issuance of the show cause notice, provisions of Sections 11AC and 11AB are not attracted. On the other hand, the ld. DR as relied upon Madhya Pradesh High Court decision in the case of Sai Machine Tools Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Indore [2006 (203) E.L.T. 15 (M.P.)]. 3. Before ap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....some period in between. Nevertheless, no mala fide can be attributed to the appellant. It is further seen that the appellant deposited the entire amount of duty even before the issuance of the show cause notice. 4. In the light of the above facts ld. Advocate has contended that in accordance with the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Machino Montell (India) Ltd. [2004 (168....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in the case of Narendra Products v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kanpur [2004 (178) E.L.T. 618 (Tri. - Del.)]. Ratio of all the decisions is that judicial discipline requires the Tribunal to follow the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court when views of other High Court are conflicting. Inasmuch as, the appellant is within the jurisdiction of Hon'ble Bombay High Court, we proposed to apply....