9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (3) TMI 643X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , SDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Heard both the sides. 2. The appellants were manufacturing both the dutiable and exempted goods from common inputs. While clearing the exempted goods, they were debiting the Modvat credit taken on the inputs used in the manufacture of such exempted goods. However, on visit of the preventive officers to the factory of the appellants on 10-1-2003, it wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of show cause notice, no penalty is imposable in view of the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Delhi-III v. Machino Montell (I) Ltd. [2004 (168) E.L.T. 466 (Tri. - LB) = 2004 (96) ECC 180 (Tri. - LB)]. 4. Shri V. Valte, ld. SDR pleaded that in case of Machino Montell (supra), the penalty was not imposed as there was no intention to evade payment of duty since the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .L.T. 136 (Tri.-Delhi). 5. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both the sides, I find that in this case, the appellants had failed to debit the Cenvat credit taken on inputs used for manufacture of exempted goods, at the time of clearance of exempted goods. They also utilised this credit for clearance of dutiable goods. Thus, the intention to evade payment of duty is quite cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
