9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 446X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 11/2010 (V-ll) CE, dt. 19.05.2010. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of records, it transpires that the issue that is contested is regarding confiscation of capital goods and redemption fine imposed thereof in lieu of confiscation and also for imposition of penalty under Provisions of Rule 15 (2) of Cenvat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fine in lieu of confiscation and appropriated the amount already paid by the appellant. On an appeal, the first appellate authority upheld the Order-in-Original in its entirety, except dropping interest liability which has been demanded and confirmed by adjudicating authority. 5. It was brought to my notice that against such an order by the first appellate authority dropping the paym ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew no interference is called for in such an order passed by the first appellate authority; as regards confiscation of goads, I find that in the facts of the case, confiscation of capital goods is correct, however, the redemption fine imposed seems to be on higher side. Since the appellant had reversed the cenvat on being pointed out, the redemption fine imposed is reduced to Rs. 2.00 lakhs (Rupees ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the month of February 2008, seems to have not been utilised for discharge of duty and it lends credence to the submission of the Ld. Counsel that the appellant had no intention to avail this Cenvat credit with intention to evade duty. The existence of intention to evade duty is primary requirement for invoking provisions of rule 15 (2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 10. In view of the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
