2009 (11) TMI 445

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and Sabhajeet Yadav, JJ. REPRESENTED BY: S/Shri K.C. Sinha and Subodh Kumar, for the Appellant. Shri S.D. Singh, Counsel, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The present appeal has been filed under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 The following substantial question of law has been sought to be raised in the appeal :- (i) Whether the respondents are liable to pay the penal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tment and the manufacturers as well. There being no clear adjudication with regard to the modvat credit facility on such item, we are of the view that the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty. The issue being debatable and still the debate is going on, no question of penalty arises. Besides above, we find that the quantum of penalty is only Rs. 54,000/ 5. In view of above, we find that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X