2015 (6) TMI 468

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted against Order-in-Appeal No. P-II/MMD/313/2012 dated 28/12/2012 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune-II wherein the learned Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order-in-original No. Adj/IKJ/02/2012-13 dated 03/08/2012. However, penalty under Rule 25(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was reduced from Rs. 18,52,070/- to Rs. 6 lakhs. 2. The fact of the case is that the ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... learned Commissioner (Appeals) has reduced the penalty to Rs. 6 lakhs. Aggrieved by the impugned order the appellant is before me. 3. Shri M.P.S. Joshi, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the entire demand was confirmed on the ground that the appellant utilised the CENVAT credit during the default period which is not permissible under Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. I find that, in the present appeal, the appellant has contested only the imposition of penalty of Rs. 6 lakhs under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. In the present case, the demand as well as the penalty was confirmed in terms of Rule 8(3)A of the C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X