- (1.) The Court : This reference application has been admitted on the following grounds: Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction the penalty under Sec. 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 beyond the scope of the proviso to the said Sec. namely if paid beyond the period stipulated therein?
(2.) Mr. Mukherjee appearing in support of the application tried to contend that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to reduce the penalty under Sec. 11AC of the Central Excise Act. on the contrary, it has been it has by Mr. Dutt before us that such question has already been decided by several Hon'ble High Courts and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India find the following decisions are cited: 1. (Tri. -Bang.) (Pashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd. v/s. Commissioner of C.Ex. Visakhapatnam.) 2., 2000(38) RLT 619(SC) (V.M. Salgaocar & Bros. P. Ltd. v/s. Commissioner of (Income Tax)
(3.) (Commissioner of Central Excise -I v/s. Gaurav Mercantiles Ltd.);