9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (7) TMI 874 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
Appeal against dropping of demand relating to 16 invoices based on receipt of goods and credit taken by the respondent. Analysis: The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi involved a dispute regarding the dropping of demand relating to 16 invoices by the Commissioner (Appeals). The respondent had received CR sheets from a manufacturer/registered dealer who had allegedly stopped using their premises. The investigation raised concerns about the authenticity of the documents based on which the respondent claimed credit. The show cause notice proposed denial of credit, specifically related to transactions from 16 invoices. The original authority dropped proceedings for denial of credit on these invoices, a decision upheld by the Commissioner. The department, in their appeal, argued that the respondent failed to prove the receipt of goods due to suspect nature of the documents. However, the Tribunal noted that the show cause notice did not question the accuracy of vehicle numbers in the invoices but rather alleged that the vehicle owners provided incorrect addresses. The Tribunal found that this discrepancy did not cast doubt on the receipt of materials by the respondent. The Tribunal emphasized that the evidence did not undermine the explanation provided by the respondent, and upheld the decisions of the lower authorities. Ultimately, the Tribunal rejected the appeal, affirming the orders of the authorities below. The Tribunal found no valid grounds to interfere with the concurrent findings in favor of the respondent. The Misc. Application seeking amendment to the prayers in the appeal memorandum was allowed and disposed of accordingly. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the dropping of demand relating to 16 invoices, emphasizing the lack of evidence to challenge the credibility of the respondent's explanation. The decision highlights the importance of substantiating claims with concrete evidence in cases involving credit transactions and receipt of goods.
|
