2008 (11) TMI 556

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Member (T) (Oral)]. Revenue has filed this appeal against Order-in-Appeal No. 311/2005-C.E., dated 29-11-2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (A), Mangalore. 2. The learned departmental representative Mrs. Sudha Koka appeared for the revenue. None appeared for the respondents. 3. The respondents manufacture pig iron. They take Cenvat credit on the inputs used. Normally, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... everse the credit in proportion to pig iron cleared without payment of duty along with interest. Therefore, he set aside the penalty imposed under Rule 13. 4. Revenue is aggrieved over the impugned order of the Commissioner (A). According to the revenue, the Commissioner (A) s observation that scheme of Rule 6 is not applicable and that the case is not covered by Rule 6 of Cenvat Credit Rules, i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e s appeal has absolutely no merit at all. The Commissioner (A) has passed a well reasoned order to the effect that the reversal of credit takes care of the interest of revenue and there is no jurisdiction for imposing any penalty under Rule 13 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. It is also seen that the issue of reversal of credit under Rule 6 was the subject matter of the decision of the Larger Bench in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X