2005 (7) TMI 406

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)].- Heard 2. Appellants have a strong case on merits as the issue involved in this appeal already stands covered in their favour by the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of C.C.E., Gurgaon v. Machino Montell (I) Ltd. reported in 2004 (168) E.L.T. 466. Therefore, the stay application is allowed. 3. In our view, the appeal, itself can be disposed of as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... imposed under Section 11AC nor interest can be demanded under Section 11AB. This proposition of law has been followed by the Divisional South Zonal Bench of the Tribunal, Bangalore in Warner Lambert India Ltd. v. C.C.E., Bangalore reported in 2004 (174) E.L.T. 386. In the face of this well settled position of law, the penalty, consequently, could not be imposed on the appellants in the present cas .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... detailed in the impugned order, cannot be legally sustained. The learned Commissioner has worked out the interest at a flat rate of 24% for the entire period (i.e. period of default till payment of duty). But the learned Counsel has produced a copy of the Notification No. 19/2002, dated 13-5-2002, vide which the rate of interest was reduced to 15%. Therefore, the interest @ more than 15% from the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X