COMMISSIONER OF C. EX. Vs. JCBL LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order in appeal dated 31 -8 -2004.

(2.) THE relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the factory premises of the respondents were visited by the preventive staff and documents were seized. On the scrutiny of the documents, it was noticed by the officers that the respondent had availed Modvat credit on some of the documents under which no inputs could be received by them. On being pointed out by the officers, the respondent deposited the entire amount of Cenvat credit. Show cause notice was issued to the respondent which was adjudicated by the adjudicating authority and the amount of duty demanded was confirmed and amount paid by the respondents was appropriated. In addition to the appropriation, the adjudicating authority imposed penalty and also sought interest. The respondent deposited the entire amount of interest involved on such demand and also 25% of the amount of penalty as per the proviso to Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944. After doing so, the appellants filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who set aside the penalty and interest on the appellants.

(3.) THE learned DR submits that setting aside of interest and penalty by the Commissioner relying upon the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Machino Montell is not correct in as much as, the said decision of the Tribunal is now declared as not a correct law by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.