1996 (4) TMI 261

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Ms. Bharati Chavan, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  Both stay application as well as the appeal are in respect of the order cited above imposing penalty of Rs. 20,000/- on the appellants. 2. Since the arguments covering both stay application as well as the appeal fall within a short compass, appeal itself was taken up for disposal, granting waiver of pre-deposit of the pena....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oken penalty of Rs. 20,000/- on the appellants for taking the pre-mature credit before installation of the Capital Goods. 4. Shri C.S. Lodha, the ld. Advocate for the appellants pleaded that during the material period, Rule 57T(3) allowed credit of duty paid on Capital Goods immediately on receipt of the goods subject furnishing the requisite declaration. These requirements have been compl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....an be taken and can be utilised has not been specifically spelt out, which came to be done only by way of amendment carried out on 1-1-1996, the appellants cannot be blamed for taking credit and utilising it during the material period. Moreover, I find that the Commissioner's findings with regard to imposition of penalty itself indicate that the concept of Modvat credit for Capital Goods was new a....