Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2010 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (5) TMI 303 - CESTAT, NEW DELHICenvat Credit - The only ground on which the impugned order is sought to be challenged is that the Commissioner (Appeals) while allowing the appeal filed by the respondent erred in reducing the penalty ignoring the mandate of rule 13(i) of the Cenvat Credit Excise Rules, 2002 as well as of rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 in relation to the minimum penalty imposable against the defaulter. Revenue challenged said reduction of penalty on ground that both rules prescribed minimum penalty, which is higher than amount of penalty imposed under impugned order. Held that - since both rules prescribed only maximum limit of penalty and neither of rules prescribed minimum amount of penalty, which is left to discretion of authority, there was no substance in challenge to impugned order by revenue.
|