https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274661 The penalty under Rule 15(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was set aside in the appeal. The appellant's failure to reverse CENVAT credit for obsolete goods was not intentional evasion, as the goods were written off but not physically removed. The introduction of a recovery mechanism after the show cause notice hindered the appellant's ability to contest the non-reversal. The penalty imposition was contested successfully, leading to its unsustainability and setting aside. The appeal was disposed of with the penalty under Rule 15(2) of the CCR, 2004 being overturned. en-us Wed, 30 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Aug 2018 10:50:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274661 The penalty under Rule 15(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was set aside in the appeal. The appellant's failure to reverse CENVAT credit for obsolete goods was not intentional evasion, as the goods were written off but not physically removed. The introduction of a recovery mechanism after the show cause notice hindered the appellant's ability to contest the non-reversal. The penalty imposition was contested successfully, leading to its unsustainability and setting aside. The appeal was disposed of with the penalty under Rule 15(2) of the CCR, 2004 being overturned. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274661