HARMAN STEELS (P) LTD. Vs. CCE CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the matter are posted today for hearing the stay application. However, as the issue involved is in very narrow compass, I stay the recovery the penalty of Rs. 20,000/ - imposed on M/s Harman Steel (P) Ltd., and take up the appeal for disposal with the consent of both the sides.

(2.) SHRI H.O.Arora, Ld. Advocate, submitted that the Deputy Commissioner had disallowed the Modvat Credit far non filing of Modvat Declaration and had imposed the penalty; that on appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals), under the impugner Order, allowed the Modvat Credit as the declaration was filed by them within 6 months of receipt of inputs in terms of provisions of Rule 57G (10) of the Central Excise Rules; that the Commissioner (Appeals), however, upheld the penalty without assigning any reason; that the question of penalty does not arise as there was no contravention of any Rules.

(3.) SHRI Swantratra Kumar, Ld. D.R., opposed the prayer by submitting that as the Modvat Credit was availed of before filing the declaration under Rule 57G, penalty is imposable on the Appellants.