2002 (2) TMI 238 - AT - Central Excise

Appeal allowed in case of disallowed Modvat credit on destroyed inputs & unjustified penalties

The appeal was allowed in a case regarding the disallowance of Modvat credit on destroyed inputs and the imposition of penalty and interest under Central ... Modvat/Cenvat - Penalty and interest Issues:1. Disallowance of Modvat credit on destroyed inputs2. Imposition of penalty and interest under Central Excise RulesIssue 1: Disallowance of Modvat credit on destroyed inputs:The case involved the appellants manufacturing communication equipment and parts under specific sub-headings. The Central Excise Officers discovered that a significant amount of input material, on which Modvat credit had been availed, was destroyed in a fire two years prior. The officers found that the appellants had not informed the department about the destruction nor reversed the Modvat credit. Subsequently, proceedings were initiated resulting in disallowance of the Modvat credit, imposition of penalty, and recovery of interest by the Joint Commissioner of Central Excise. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this decision, leading to the current appeal.Issue 2: Imposition of penalty and interest under Central Excise Rules:During the appeal, the appellants contested the penalty and interest amounts imposed on them. They argued that the Modvat credit was correctly taken when the inputs were received, and the subsequent destruction due to fire did not involve any violation of Modvat rules at the time of credit availing. The appellants maintained that since the Modvat credit was not taken wrongly or through fraudulent means, penalties and interest should not be imposed. The Appellate Tribunal agreed with the appellants, noting that the penalty under Rule 57-I(4) is applicable only in cases of fraud, wilful misstatement, collusion, or contravention of rules to evade duty payment. As the destruction of inputs was not due to any such reasons, the penalty was deemed unjustified. Similarly, the interest provision under Rule 57-I(5) was found inapplicable since the credit was not taken wrongly. The Tribunal further observed that the appellants had maintained a credit exceeding the recovery amount, causing no loss to the Revenue. Consequently, the penalty and interest imposed were set aside, and the appeal was allowed.