2009 (1) TMI 589

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Respondent. [Order]. - This is an appeal by the Revenue for modifying the impugned order-in-appeal dated 16-11-06 passed by CCE (Appeals) in case of the Respondent regarding non-imposition of penalty under Section 11AC read with Rule 25(1) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 and Rule 13(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. In this case, at the time of the officer's visit to the Respondent's unit, sho....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Revenue against Assistant Commissioner's order, the Commissioner (Appeal) vide the impugned order upheld the Assistant Commissioner's order. 2. None appeared for the Respondent. Heard the learned Departmental Representative. He pleaded that since this is a case of the shortage of Cenvated input, thus this is a clandestine removal and penalty under Section 11AC would be attracted and since....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sonal hearing, the Appellant pleaded that actually there was no shortage and the authorized signatory, not being a technical person could not explain it at that time, that since they had been given to understand that no proceedings would be initiated for imposition of penalty if the disputed amount of Cenvat credit reversed, they reversed the same. The Assistant Commissioner after giving a finding....