9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (8) TMI 417X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder]. - No representation for the respondents in spite of notice. This case was adjourned on an earlier occasion at the instance of the respondents. This time, there is no request for any adjournment either. I have examined the records and heard ld. SDR. A party viz. M/s. Sandeep Steel & Agro Industries ("M/s. Sandeep", for short) had taken Modvat credit on a quantity of 33.020 MTs of their raw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p and the respondents. The Commissioner (Appeals) took a lenient view and vacated the penalty imposed on the respondents. Hence, this appeal of the Revenue. 2. Ld. SDR, submits that illegal availment of Modvat credit without receipt of inputs is a fact admitted by M/s. Sandeep, reversed the credit forthwith at the instance of the Department. It was as late as on 21-9-2000 only that the respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transported the goods should be taken. On the other hand, what is found against the respondents is that the statement dated 21-9-2000 of Shri Pushkar Raj (proprietor), is an afterthought. The fact remains that it was only 21-9-2000 that the respondents were summoned by the Department. On that very day, Shri Pushkar Raj stated that they had sold the goods under cover of invoice to M/s. Sandeep. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
