https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123977 Penalties for irregular availment of MODVAT credit under Rule 57-I(4) and Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 require specific allegations and proof of fraud, wilful misstatement, collusion, suppression of facts, or contravention with intent to evade duty. The notice invoked Rule 173Q without stating any specific clause or factual basis, and the record showed reversal of credit once the irregularity was pointed out. On those facts, mens rea was not established, so the Rule 173Q penalty was unsustainable and the Rule 57-I(4) penalty was also unjustified. Both penalties were set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Sep 2017 13:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123977 Penalties for irregular availment of MODVAT credit under Rule 57-I(4) and Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 require specific allegations and proof of fraud, wilful misstatement, collusion, suppression of facts, or contravention with intent to evade duty. The notice invoked Rule 173Q without stating any specific clause or factual basis, and the record showed reversal of credit once the irregularity was pointed out. On those facts, mens rea was not established, so the Rule 173Q penalty was unsustainable and the Rule 57-I(4) penalty was also unjustified. Both penalties were set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123977