2005 (6) TMI 65

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion of interest against the respondents, by modification of the impugned order vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has imposed penalty of Rs. 5,000/- on account of wrongful availment of Modvat credit by the respondents of Rs. 1,15,525/- and dropped the demand of interest in toto. 2. I have heard both the sides. The representative appearing on behalf of the respondent has contended that since th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... st under Rule 57-I as the said rule specifically provides the imposition of penalty equal to the amount of the credit wrongfully availed by the assessee and also the liability of the assessee to pay interest thereon. The provisions of this rule, if read as a whole, makes it quite clear that these are mandatory and no exception can be carved out thereunder. The provisions of Section 11A have got no .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd of interest. 3. Keeping in view the amount of credit wrongly availed by the respondents, the penalty imposed on them by the Commissioner (Appeals) is too low and disproportionate. Accordingly, the same is raised/enhanced to Rs. 50,000/-. The demand of interest against the respondents is also confirmed. In other words, they are liable to pay interest also as per law. The impugned order accordin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X