https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355376 The Tribunal dismissed the ROM application, upholding the penalty imposed on the applicant under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, for wrongly availed credit. Despite the absence of allegations of mis-declaration or fraud, the Tribunal found sufficient evidence of inadmissible credit taken by the applicant, justifying the penalty. The Tribunal emphasized the repeated instances of wrongly availed credit as clear evidence against the applicant, leading to the conclusion that the penalty was warranted. en-us Thu, 28 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Feb 2018 09:33:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355376 The Tribunal dismissed the ROM application, upholding the penalty imposed on the applicant under Rule 15(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, for wrongly availed credit. Despite the absence of allegations of mis-declaration or fraud, the Tribunal found sufficient evidence of inadmissible credit taken by the applicant, justifying the penalty. The Tribunal emphasized the repeated instances of wrongly availed credit as clear evidence against the applicant, leading to the conclusion that the penalty was warranted. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 28 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355376