2022 (3) TMI 48

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of fact on the part of the assessee. Therefore, the correct rule for penalty to be invoked is Rule 15(4) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and not Rule 15(2). However, whether there is suppression of fact or otherwise the matter in the assessee s case M/S FASCEL LIMITED (PRESENTLY KNOWN AS VODAFONE ESSAR GUJARAT LIMITED) , BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, VODAFONE ESSAR GUJARAT LIMITED, BHARAT SANCHAR NI .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... venue submits that there is apparent error in mentioning the Rule 15(2) whereas Rule 15(4) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 should have been invoked according to which equal amount of service tax to be imposed as penalty under Rule 15(4). He submits that the Adjudicating Authority has elaborately discussed that there is suppression of fact on the part of the respondent. Accordingly, the penalty under .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ) ELT 79 (Tri.Mum) * Jogani Tyres (India) - 2010 (255) ELT 264 (Tri.Mum) * Shaila Crown P Ltd - 2004 (175) ELT 571 (Tri. Del) 2.1 He also submits that against the same impugned order M/s BSNL's appeal No ST/307/2010 has been disposed of by way of remand to decide whether there is suppression of fact on the part of the appellant or not. 3. None appeared on behalf of the respondent despite not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X