9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 1240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been cleared clandestinely - Held that:- As per SCN, penalties proposed to be imposed on the basis of assumption and presumptions that appellant would have been issued the duty paid invoices without supplying the goods to unknown buyers is the allegation against the appellant which is only on the basis of assumption and presumption and for imposing penalties under Rule 25 mens rea is required ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uantity received by the appellant is less, the appellant is intimating to the head office for the variation of quantity. The period involved in the case is November, 2006 to February, 2009. An investigation was conducted at the premises of the appellant, where it was found that appellant has received quantities more than the quantity mentioned in the invoices and taken the excess Cenvat credit. Bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 02. Against the said order, appellant is before me. 3. It is the contention of the learned Counsel that penalty has been imposed without alleging any mens rea and only on the basis of assumption and presumption, that appellant would have been allowed the Cenvat credit of excess difference in quantity to some person in vacuum. Therefore, penalty under Rule 25 is not imposable. 4. On the other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xcise Rules, 2002 does not arise. Further, I find that as per show cause notice penalties proposed to be imposed on the basis of assumption and presumptions that appellant would have been issued the duty paid invoices without supplying the goods to unknown buyers is the allegation against the appellant which is only on the basis of assumption and presumption and for imposing penalties under Rule 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
