2004 (11) TMI 271

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r (J)]. - We have heard Shri S.C. Mohanty, ld. Advocate for the appellants and Shri J.R. Madhiam, ld. JDR for the respondents. 2. Shri Mohanty submits that the impugned order is grossly erroneous, highly arbitrary and bad in law. Mere delay in accounting the production figures for only three days in RG 1 Register due to re-conciliation of stock figures preparation of monthly RT 12 return, will .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is highly unjustified and illegal, without taking into consideration and verification of the prescribed records i.e. RG 23A Part I. He also submits that the penalty under Rule 57-I(5) and interest under Rule 57(4) not maintainable since the discrepancy relates to 1995-96, whereas the above provisions were introduced with effect from 23-7-1996. He, therefore, submits that the appeal may kindly be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed, even though the relevant invoices contained the debit entry. This facts has been admitted by the appellant. It was debited only on detection by the Preventive Officers on 6-1-97 and therefore, the appellants were liable to pay interest chargeable under Rules/Acts. The appellants have admitted that they have received 15935.810 MT of Sponge Iron and availed Modvat credit on the entire quantity. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X