2007 (8) TMI 617

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the Respondent. [Order]. -  Nobody was present on behalf of the appellant. Accordingly, I have heard the learned SDR and gone through the impugned order. 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of plasticizers falling under sub-heading 2917.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and are availing cenvat credit facility under Rule 3 of the Cenvat Credit Rule, 2002....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to 17-5-2003 came to Rs. 9,72,346/- whereas the credit admissible to the appellants was only Rs. 4,20,120/- resulting into excess availment of credit of Rs. 5,52,226/-. The appellants had thus taken cenvat credit wrongly by not disclosing the full facts to the Department in contravention of Rule 3(6)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 with the intention to evade payment of duty. On being pointed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Audit. They also paid interest of Rs. 1,10,325/-. It is not a case where modvat credit was availed in excess by any fraudulent mean. As contended by the appellant, the same appears to be result of inadvertent mistake they have occurred on account of mis-calculation. Immediate reversal appellant by the appellant reflects upon their bona fide. Further, the payment of interest to the tune of Rs. 1.10....