9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 580X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that the Asstt. Collector of Central Excise, by his letter, dated 15-4-1994, allowed a credit of Rs. 51,74,193.38 to the appellants under Rule 57H of the Rules. However, he made it clear that the above permission is based on the record produced by the appellants, but if it is established on further investigation that the substantiating or corroborating documents were not exactly contemporaneous to the claim made, it shall be automatically deemed to be wilful misstatement of facts and suppression of material evidence. Subsequently, the Superintendent of the Central Excise, Range A Dharwad, verified the documents and he noted several discrepancies. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the appellants denying the credit of Rs. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed declaration on 22-3-94 with the Asstt. Collector seeking permission under Rule 57H of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for availment of Modvat credit of Rs. 56,72,878/- in respect of the input used in the final products, furnishing required details inputs-wise as on 21-3-1994, setting out the Gate Passes numbers with dates, quantity and duty paid on the inputs that were lying in the Godown. The credit of Rs. 16,27,814.50 claimed on 1,17,845 Kgs of staple fibres under process was denied by the Appellate Authority holding that the appellants have failed to clearly substantiate the actual process stock with the documentary evidence. The finding of the Appellate Authority that there was fire in the factory during November 93 has not been fully ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... henticated nor signed by anybody nor any receipt by the Bank is available. Therefore, its veracity is doubtful. The Chartered Account s Certificate as claimed to have verified the copy of the stock position as on 25-3-1994, submitted to the Bank of Mysore is dated 25-11-2002, signed by Shri S.P. Pagad. Thus it appears to be fabricated as on 25-11-2002, one cannot verify stock of 25-3-1994. He has stated that there was fire in the factory of the appellants and damaged stock was also in process which has been never quantified by the appellants and most of the Gate Passes on which they are relying for credit under Rule 57H are for the period prior to November 1993. Hence, it becomes relevant to ascertain correct stock position. Only in 1999, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... either it can be linked with any duty paying documents nor there was any stock of inputs material in-process shown separately. The appellants have accepted before the Original Authority in response to the show cause notice that they were not maintaining any record as it is not possible to take exact quantity of in-process stock every day. However the system is to take physical verification on monthly basis. They have taken stock on 28-2-1994 and 25-3-1994 and the difference was submitted to their Bank. We find that the claim that have been submitted to their Bankers shows a quantity 64,205 Kgs of raw material in-process as on 25-3-1994 whereas it was claimed before the lower authority that a quantity of 1,17,845 Kgs of raw material was in p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
