1 abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CENTRAL EXCISE APPLICATION NO. 14 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-II .. Applicant V/s M/s Paranjape Autocast Pvt. Ltd. .. Respondent Mr. A.S. Rao with Mr. Rohit B. Pardeshi for the applicant. Ms. Sonali Patil i/b Akshar Laws for the respondent. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & D.G. KARNIK, JJ. DATE : 24TH SEPTEMBER 2009 P.C. : 1. The Department has preferred this application for reference on the following question: “Whether the Tribunal is correct in laws in reducing the mandatory penalty when section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 clearly states that where any duty of excise has not been levied or paid or has been short-levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded by reasons of fraud, collusion or any willful mis-statement or suppression of facts or contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or of the rules made 2 thereunder with intent to evade payment of duty, the person who is liable to pay duty as determined under sub-section (2) of section 11A, shall also be liable to pay a penalty equal to the duty so determined?” 2. Considering the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Dharmendra Textiles, 231 ELT 3 (SC), the learned Tribunal is directed to make a reference to this Court within 8 weeks from the receipt of a copy of this order. 3. The application is disposed off accordingly. (D.G. KARNIK, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.)