https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261663 The judgment upheld the demand for Cenvat credit with interest due to the assessee's failure to provide evidence of the legitimate usage of materials in their factory, as required by Rule 9(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Despite a plea for remand to produce records, the tribunal rejected it, citing the lack of evidence over time. The penalty imposed was limited to 25% of the amount due, considering the lower sum involved and the context of credit taken during factory construction. Ultimately, the penalty was set aside, emphasizing the importance of accurate record-keeping and the tribunal's discretion in penalty imposition based on individual case circumstances. en-us Mon, 09 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Jul 2015 11:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261663 The judgment upheld the demand for Cenvat credit with interest due to the assessee's failure to provide evidence of the legitimate usage of materials in their factory, as required by Rule 9(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Despite a plea for remand to produce records, the tribunal rejected it, citing the lack of evidence over time. The penalty imposed was limited to 25% of the amount due, considering the lower sum involved and the context of credit taken during factory construction. Ultimately, the penalty was set aside, emphasizing the importance of accurate record-keeping and the tribunal's discretion in penalty imposition based on individual case circumstances. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 09 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261663