TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M.M. KUMAR and JASWANT SINGH, JJ. Mr. Gurpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel for Indirect Taxes, for the appellant. [Judgment per : M.M. KUMAR, J.]. - This order shall dispose of CEA Nos. 79 and 83 of 2009, which have been filed under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for brevity, 'the Act') against the orders dated 26.3.2008 and 22.4.2008 passed by the Customs, Excise and Ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in appearance on behalf of the dealer-respondent(s). The view of the Bombay High Court has been overruled by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune v. SKF India Ltd. , 2009 (239) E.L.T. 385 (S.C.). The view of Hon'ble the Supreme Court is discernible from the observation made in para 14, which reads thus:- "14. We are unable to subscribe to the view ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision Bench judgment of Bombay High Court, which stands overruled. Therefore, the answer to the aforesaid question has to be in the affirmative and differential amount of duty on the basis of upward revision of price of the goods sold earlier, would attract levy of interest under Section 11AB of the Act. The appeals are, therefore, allowed. The impugned orders dated 26.3.2008 and 22.4.2008, passe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
