9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 785X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellants used capital goods exclusively for exempted goods and hence it has been held by the authorities below that they were not entitled to credit of Rs. 8691/-. 2. Shri S.D. Sankaran, ld. consultant appearing for the appellants states that the entire amount of Rs. 8691/- has been paid back after being pointed out by the department. The appellants did not have any intention to wrongly uti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a period of three months after the lapse of six months. He pleads that this is not a case of wrongly taking or wrongly utilizing the credit. In any case, the appellants maintained much higher credit balance at all point of time. Therefore, he submits that penalty and interest levied should be set aside. 4. Heard ld. SDR Shri Dhanasekaran. 5. As regards the amount of Rs. 8691/-, in view of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, there was no proposal for confiscation, at the most penalty can be imposed under Rule 15(1) up to the maximum limit of Rs. 10,000/-. 7. In view of the fact that there is no finding of suppression etc. and this is not a case of wrongly taking credit or wrongly utilizing the credit (in fact, the appellants had credit more than the impugned amount at all point of time), interest and penalty can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
