9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Shri K. Sambi Reddy, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : T.K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - The appellant has filed an application for stay of the operation of the Order-in-Appeal No. 130/2005-CE, dated 29-12-2005 and for full waiver of the pre-deposit amount of duty and penalty each amounting to Rs. 2,29,841/-. 2. Shri V. Raghuraman, the learned Advocate appeared on behalf of the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion that the order of the lower authority is correct. The duty involved is Rs. 2,29,841/- only. Equal penalty has been imposed. 4. The learned SDR fairly concedes that there is enough evidence to show that the appellants have not claimed depreciation on that portion of the Cenvat credit on the Capital Goods. 5. We ave gone through the records of the case carefully. As the issue lies w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act as well as Cenvat Credit Rules 2001/2002. We agree with the learned Advocate that there is no intention to evade payment of duty and, therefore, the longer period cannot be invoked. The findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the appellants have availed both Cenvat credit and the depreciation without the knowledge of the department is not borne out by facts as can be seen from the Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
