9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (6) TMI 348X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t) to their sister concern viz., M/s. Daya Casters (DC, for short) without payment of duty or observing any other Central Excise formality. The appellants claimed that the Cenvat-availed input had been sent to M/s. DC only for job work purpose. But the investigators found that the appellants had not used Rule 57F(4) challans or any other document for the movement of Cenvat-availed input to M/s. DC and also had not paid any amount as labour charges to M/s. DC. Thus it appeared to the Department that the appellants had diverted Cenvat-availed input clandestinely without payment of duty during 2000-01. Hence a show cause notice was issued to them. In their reply to the notice, they claimed that they had used all Cenvat-availed inputs in the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of the original authority did not succeed before the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal. 2. Heard both sides. Ld. Counsel for the appellants submitted that certain entries in the BIN cards showing certain quantities of aluminium ingots as having been issued to M/s. DC formed the sole basis for the demand of duty against them. The BIN cards, which were created for the old period for the purpose of obtaining ISO certification for the company, were not trustworthy, as they did not reflect correct movement of aluminium ingots. Counsel submitted that no other evidence was adduced by the Department to support the allegation that the appellants had removed credit-availed ingots to M/s. DC without payment of duty. Had there been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een sent to M/s. DC for job work. In their statement, M/s. DC denied having received any labour charges from the appellants. In the circumstances, the factum of removal of credit-availed inputs by the appellants to their sister concern viz. M/s. DC was undeniable. 4. After giving careful consideration to the submissions, I find much force in the submissions made by ld. DR. I have perused the entries made by the appellants in their IDENTITY-CUM-BIN CARD FOR RAW MATERIAL vide pages 29 to 43 of the Paper Book filed by the appellants. In the appeal memo, the party has referred to these as untrustworthy BIN cards . Ld. Counsel has also endeavoured to show that this record is unreliable. It has been claimed that this was being maintained, fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o stand by these records. Hence I reject their contention that the entries found in their BIN cards are not reliable evidence. These BIN card entries cannot be treated merely as private accounts as they were presented to an international organisation (ISO) for a purpose affecting the public. Hence the Tribunal s decision cited by ld. Counsel is of no aid to the appellants. Moreover, their own Accounts Officer has stated that they had removed credit-availed aluminium ingots to M/s. DC for job work. On their part, M/s. DC have not contradicted this. What they have stated is that they did not receive job charges from the appellants. Thus physical removal of credit-availed ingots by the appellants to M/s. DC is a fact adequately proved by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
