9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 297X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hout actually receiving and utilizing the inputs for final product whereas as per assessee, they had actually received the material and utilized the same in the manufacture of their finished goods. The Revenue is relying upon various statements and samples drawn during the course of search. On analysis of evidence on record, the Tribunal has categorically found that samples and statements of buyers do not prove beyond doubt that material has not been received, rather observations of the learned Commissioner and documentary evidence prove that material was actually utilized by the assessee for manufacturing of final product. – Tribunal order in favor of assessee upheld - 187 Of 2005 - - - Dated:- 21-4-2010 - CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTIC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said manufacturer?" The Respondent is engaged in the manufacture of Woolen Yarn, Acrylic Yarn and Woolen Blended Yarn falling under Chapter Heading 51 of the Central Excise Tariff Act as well as man-made Yarn falling under Chapter Heading 55 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. The assessee manufactured blended Woolen Yarn by using Polyester, Polyester Filament Yarn as input and it was purchased from different manufacturers and dealers. The Revenue issued a Show Cause Notice alleging that during January' 1997 to March' 2000, the Respondent did not actually receive and utilize Polyester Filament Yarn whereas credit was availed. The Adjudicating Authority, i.e. the Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana disallowed credit of Rs. 44,09, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Commissioner as well as the Tribunal shows that the respondents had adduced sufficient documentary evidence to prove that they had used Polyester Filament Yarn (PFY) in the manufacture of final product, i.e. wool polyester blended yarn and had availed the credit of duty paid on the PFY. The record of the respondents was checked and verified by the officers of the Department from time to time when they visited the factory premises of the respondents. Requisite entries regarding receipt of the yarn was made in RG 23-A Part 1 Register and the respondents had also filed declaration wherein the final produce was also mentioned. The Department was also informed about the receipt of PFY from the suppliers/agents and the same was used in the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be disallowed modvat credit. We do not find that any question much less substantial question of law is involved in the present appeal. The dispute raised by Revenue is purely of fact and no substantial question of law is involved. As per Revenue, the assessee has availed credit without actually receiving and utilizing the inputs for final product whereas as per assessee, they had actually received the material and utilized the same in the manufacture of their finished goods. The Revenue is relying upon various statements and samples drawn during the course of search. On analysis of evidence on record, the Tribunal has categorically found that samples and statements of buyers do not prove beyond doubt that material has not been received, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
