9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to evade the duty. Appellant contested the imposition of penalty Held that:- The appellant do not dispute that the scrapped capital goods cleared on 4.5.2008 were cenvat credit availed and an amount equal to the duty on the transaction value was payable in terms of Rule 3(5A) of the Cenvat Credit Rules and also the amount payable in terms of Rule 3(5A) was liable to be paid along with the du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nufacturers of Rectified Spirit, Extra Neutral Alcohol, Carbon dioxide and Bio Compost chargeable to central excise duty. They availed cenvat credit of central excise duty paid on the inputs and capital goods as per the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant on 4.2.2008 5.2.2008 cleared about 34 M.M. of scrapped capital goods in respect of which earlier the cenvat credit had been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osed penalty of equal amount under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules read with Section 11 AC holding that the appellant had deliberately not paid this amount. On appeal being filed to the Commissioner (Appeals) against this order, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Asstt. Commissioner s order. Against this Asstt. Commissioner s order, this appeal has been filed challenging the imposition of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the cenvat credit account, it cannot be alleged that the appellant had intention to evade this payment when this amount was paid before the due date and that in view of this, imposition of penalty under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules read with Section 11 AC is not sustainable. 3. Ms. S. Bector, Authorised Departmental Representative defended the impugned order reiterating the findings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of the scrap cleared on 4.2.2008 5.2.2008 was liable to be paid by 5th of next month i.e. by 5th March, 2008 and as such, just because this amount was not paid immediately on clearance, it would not be correct to say that the appellant had intention to evade the payment when there is no dispute that the amount was paid on 7.2.2008 i.e. much before the due date for payment of duty i.e. 5th of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
