2009 (5) TMI 297

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nts filed written submissions and requested to decide the matter in their absence on merit on the basis of available records. 2. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Cotton Yarn, classifiable under Chapter 52 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On 16-7-2004 the appellants opted for exemption from central excise dut .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 0/2004-Ex (supra) allowed exemption subject to no credit availed on inputs and, therefore, denial of credit on capital goods is not proper. The appellants also contended that they have not utilized the credit in question and, therefore, imposition of penalty is not warranted. 4. I find that Rule 6(4) of Rules provides that "no Cenvat credit shall be allowed on capital goods which are exclusively .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ty. However, I find force in the submission of the appellants in respect of imposition of penalty. It appears that the appellants had not utilized the credit taken on the capital goods during the material period. Further, in the present case eligibility of credit is the subject of interpretation of provisions of law. So, imposition of penalty under Rule 15 of Rules is not warranted. 5. In view of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X