TMI Blog2002 (9) TMI 194X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed by the Commissioner of Central Excise vide which he had confirmed the recovery/reversal of the Modvat credit of Rs. 33,68,240/- under Rule 57-I of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules and imposed penalty of equal amount under Section 11AC read with Rule 173-Q, and demanded interest thereon on account of inadmissible Modvat credit availed by them, during the disputed period from June, 1999 to Dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat penalty could be imposed for wrong availment of the Modvat credit, under Rule 173Q or Rule 57-I(4) of the Rules, but the same had not been invoked in the show cause notice. Therefore, the penalty as well as the interest demanded from the appellants under the said sections deserves to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, the learned DR, has only reiterated the correctness of the impugned order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder of the Commissioner in this regard, therefore, cannot be sustained and as such is set aside. The penalty equal to the credit amount as determined by the adjudicating authority in the impugned order, could only be imposed under Rule 57-I(4) of the Rules. But the said rule had not been invoked and referred to for demanding the penalty in the show cause notice. Therefore, the penalty under the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
