(1.) In this appeal, the appellants have questioned the validity of the imposition of penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/ - under Rule 173Q of the Rules by the Commissioner (Appeals) through the impugned order -in -appeal dated 19 -3 -2002.
(2.) The facts are not much in dispute. The appellants are SSI unit engaged in the manufacture of M.S. Tubes. They are availing Modvat facility and paying duty on monthly basis in terms of Rule 173 -G(1) of the Rules. However, during the scrutiny of their RT -12 return for the quarter ending 30 -9 -2000 to 31 -3 -2001, it revealed that they had utilised the Cenvat credit accumulated daring the first fortnight of the month towards payment of duty relating to the preceding month. They availed and utilised the credit of Rs. 6,04,993/ - during the period September, 2000 to March, 2001 which was not due to them and as such, there was a short payment of duty of this amount by them. They also did not follow the procedure prescribed under Rule 173AB and Rule 173G and thereby rendered themselves liable for penal action. They were served with show cause notice and after getting their reply, the Additional Commissioner confirmed the duty along with interest and also imposed penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/ - on the appellants.
(3.) So far as the confirmation of duty along with interest against the appellants is concerned, the same has not been contested. The Counsel has not disputed before me that there was violation of provisions of Rule 173 -G(1)(a) of the Rules and also of newly inserted Rule 57AB which was introduced vide Notification No. 48/2000 -C.E. (N.T.), dated 1 -8 -2000. Therefore, the findings of the authorities below that only credit accrued to the appellants during the preceding month was available for paying duty up to 15th of the month but they utilised the credit for payment of duty which accrued in the current month wrongly and thereby they made short payment of duty of the disputed amount of Rs. 6,04,994/ - by making overdrawl from the Cenvat credit account, must be affirmed.