2014 (8) TMI 226

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., installation and commissioning service" for the period from December 2005 to March 2006, appropriated equal amount already paid towards the demand, raised demand of interest thereon under section 11AB of the Central Excise Act and imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,15,526 under rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. There is no representation for the appellant today despite notice, nor any request for adjournment. I have perused the records and heard the learned Superintendent (Authorised Representative). The appellant was engaged in the manufacture of conveyors and parts thereof and were availing of and utilizing Cenvat credit for payment of duty of excise thereon during the aforesaid period. They had registration with the Department as a ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is dispute that the original authority took the aforesaid decision which, in due course, came to be affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals). On a perusal of the grounds of appeal, I find that the challenge is against the demand of interest on duty under section 11AB of the Central Excise Act and the imposition of penalty under rule 15/section 11AC. It is submitted that no interest could have been demanded under section 11AB of the Central Excise Act and that any such demand could have been made only under section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994. Further, it is submitted that, as the duty was paid before issue of show-cause notice, no penalty could have been imposed under section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. "No positive evidence" was adduced....