Full Judgment
2. The impugned order has been passed by the adjudicating authority in pursuance of the Tribunal's Final Order No. 2-3/2002-C dated 1.1.2002.
The Tribunal vide the said order directed the adjudicating authority to requantify the duty in accordance with law after examining the question whether modvat credit of duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of the products in question, as detailed in the order of the Tribunal, could be allowed to the assessee and also the question whether the benefit of abatement of duty from the sale price for the purpose of determining the assessable value could be granted to them or not.
3. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of blood grouping reagents and diagnostic or laboratory reagents. They neither took Central Excise Registration nor paid the Central Excise duty at the time of removal of the goods in question. In the earlier order dated 1.1.2002, the Tribunal had negatived the plea of the appellants that the demand was time barred. The Tribunal also decided the issue of the classification of the disputed goods against the appellants, while directing the adjudicating authority to requantify the duty amount in accordance with law.
4. The adjudicating authority as observed above, had quantified the duty as per the direction of the Tribunal and also imposed penalty under Section 11 AC and Rule 173Q. keeping in view the duty amount evaded by the appellants. The interest has also been demanded under Section 11AB of the Act.
5. In the present appeal, the appellants have no doubt raised the issue of limitation and classification of the goods, But both these issues had already been decided against them by the Tribunal vide its earlier order dated 1.1.2002. That order no doubt, as stated by the Counsels before us, had been challenged by the appellants before the Apex Court.
But there is nothing in the order to suggest that if the operation of the order of the Tribunal had been put in abeyance or stated by the Apex Court. Therefore, that order of the Tribunal till it is reversed, altered or modified by the Apex Court, is binding on the appellants and issues of classification and the limitation, cannot, be reagitated by them, before us in the present appeal.
6. No illegality, irregularity in the determination of the duty as per the direction of the Tribunal, by the adjudicating authority, has been pointed out by the Counsel, in the impugned order under appeal before us. Learned Counsel has only prayed for reduction of the penalty imposed on the appellants under Section 11AC. We do not find any sufficient ground to accept this prayer of the Counsel, keeping the facts and circumstances of the case. The impugned order has been passed by the adjudicating authority in accordance with the direction given by the Tribunal vide its earlier orders dated 1.1.2002. Therefore, we uphold the impugned order of the adjudicating authority.
7. Consequently, the appeal of the appellants being without merit, is dismissed.