2009 (12) TMI 785

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....DR, for the Respondent. ORDER Heard both sides. The case involves two issues. The appellants used capital goods exclusively for exempted goods and hence it has been held by the authorities below that they were not entitled to credit of Rs. 8691/-. 2.  Shri S.D. Sankaran, ld. consultant appearing for the appellants states that the entire amount of Rs. 8691/- has been paid back after b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ix months. As such, the amount has been paid after this being pointed out by the department within a period of three months after the lapse of six months. He pleads that this is not a case of wrongly taking or wrongly utilizing the credit. In any case, the appellants maintained much higher credit balance at all point of time. Therefore, he submits that penalty and interest levied should be set asi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the second part of Rule 15(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 would attract both confiscation and penalty. In this case, there was no proposal for confiscation, at the most penalty can be imposed under Rule 15(1) up to the maximum limit of Rs. 10,000/-. 7.  In view of the fact that there is no finding of suppression etc. and this is not a case of wrongly taking credit or wrongly utilizing th....