2000 (1) TMI 363

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. -  After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 5,000.00, I take up the appeal itself, as the issue lies in a narrow compass. 2. The appellants are working under the Modvat Scheme. In respect of the Gate Pass dated 16-2-1993 showing the payment of duty of Rs. 13,292.40 on the goods involved therein, the appellants took t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....clerical staff who is responsible for maintaining the RG23A Part-II Accounts. He submits that this was an inadvertent mistake which was detected by the appellants and reported to the Central Excise Authorities. Immediately after the detection, the debit entry was made in their record. As such, to penalise the appellants on a clerical mistake is neither justified nor warranted. For his above conten....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....k Credit of duty in excess by Rs. 10,000.00 so as to cover the clearance of their final product involving higher quantum of duty. He submits that there is a motive behind taking the excess Credit which was reported to the authorities only after a period of two months. As such, he submits that the penalty imposed upon the appellants is justified. 7. In his rejoinder, Shri B.N. Chattopadhyay....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tum of clearance of goods against the insufficient balance, taking of Credit on the same date and taking of excess Credit, cannot be a co-incidence. The detailed reasoning given by the Assistant Commissioner reflects upon the intention of the appellants to take the excess Credit. He has rightly observed that had the appellants not taken the excess Credit of duty, there would have been insufficient....