2008 (8) TMI 941

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... espondent. ORDER [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J) (Oral)]. - This appeal arises from Order-in-Appeal No. 35/2006, dated 15-2-2007. The appellants have been alleged to have irregularly availed Cenvat credit of ₹ 2,12,849/- under Rule 12 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Refined Edible Oil. During .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e produced all the documents to show all the details and the same has not been verified by the concerned officers and denial of Cenvat credit is not justified. 2. It is submitted by the learned Counsel that in this case, they have paid the duty and interest before the issue of show cause notice and hence, penalty is not leviable. He submits that the documents produced by them clearly indicate t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ume, rate, brand, packing, quantity, etc. All the details have been shown in the printed invoices issued by HPCL, IOCL and others. Therefore, these details are required to be verified by the Original Authority. We find that the appellants have not done deliberately any action requiring for imposition of penalty. We set aside the penalty imposed in the present case and remand the case for re-adjudi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X