9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 940X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Respondent. ORDER This is an appeal filed by the Deptt. against Commissioner (Appeals)'s order No. 266-CE/BPL/2006 dated 9-3-07 by which the Commissioner (Appeals), while upholding the confirmation of the Cenvat credit demand against the respondent, reduced the penalty under Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 from Rs. 1,08,160/- to Rs. 8,000/-. The department has filed appeal against th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which contravention has been committed or Rs. 1,000/- whichever is greater and that since in this case the wrongly taken Cenvat credit is Rs. 1,08,000/-, penalty equal to this amount was warranted as per the provisions of Rule 15(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. In this regard, he also cited the Tribunal's order in the case of CCE, Lucknow v Sarjoo Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. - 2006 (204) E.L.T. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion has been committed is more than Rs. 10,000/-, penalty not exceeding the amount of duty involved can be imposed. Penalty within these upper limits can be imposed. From the language of this sub-rules, it cannot be inferred that only the penalty equal to these upper limits has to be imposed. The Deptt.'s contention would have been correct if instead of the words "not exceeding", the words "equal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
