TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (4) TMI 1240
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....spondent. ORDER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order for imposing penalty under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a depot and receiving goods from various factories and availing Cenvat credit on the basis of quantity shown in the invoices at the time of clearance by the factory. Before receiving the goods, the goods w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s presumed that the difference in quantity would have been cleared clandestinely and that the said credit would have been allowed by the appellant to use by same person against the invoices to be issued by the appellant without supplying the goods. On these presumptions, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant proposing penalty under Rule 25 and Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cise return. He further submits that if the penalty under Rule 25 is not imposable, even penalty under Rule 27 is imposable on the appellant for contravention of the provisions of Central Excise Act/Rules. 5. Heard the parties. Considered the submissions. 6. In this case, both penalties under Rule 25 and Rule 27 were proposed in the show cause notice but both the lower authorities have....