M.S. Sonak, J.

Heard Ms. A. Desai, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Y. Nadkarni, learned Counsel for the respondent.

2. At the outset, an order was made in Excise Appeals No. 5/2006, 6/2006 and 7/2006 to the effect that the same shall not be placed before the Bench in which one of us (M.S. Sonak, J.) is a party.

3. The learned Counsel appearing for the parties however, state that there is no difficulty, if this Bench takes up the remaining Excise Appeals, since issues raised in these Excise Appeals, stand substantially covered by the ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Shree Bhagwati Steel Rolling Mills Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and another (2015 AIR SCW 6453).

4. These two Appeals are directed against the order dated 23.10.2006 made by the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), whereby Appeal instituted by the respondent/ Assessee came to be allowed and the Appeal instituted by the appellant/Revenue for seeking enhancement of penalty imposed by the commissioner, came to be rejected.

5. In these matters, the Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise issued five show cause notices to the respondent/Assessee demanding central e