9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (6) TMI 494X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Auto Ltd. (herein after referred to as Fiat) are the appellants. They are inter alia engaged in the manufacture of motor vehicles. Various parts were supplied by M/s. Premier Auto Vehicles Ltd. (for short PAL) on job work basis and motor vehicles assembled and cleared on payment of duty. Fiat raised invoices on PAL for the job charges. PAL issued commercial invoice to the dealers for the sale price of the said cars. Procedure under notification 27/92 was followed; thus PAL was exempt from the provision of Rule 174 as they had given the authorization to Fiat and had undertaken to pay duty differential if any on the sale price sale being incorrect. 1.3 Sr. No. 195 of notification 4/97 exempted motor vehicles which after clearance were regis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . (b) After getting appellants signature on the refund application, the same was handed over to PAL for submitting to the excise authorities. (c) Along with the application, the following documents were attached and filed with Central Excise Dept by PAL. (i) registration certificate from RTO as evidence for registration of vehicle as taxi; (ii) original triplicate copy of invoice under which said car was cleared; (d) On written confirmation from excise authorities that the refund claim was in order, PAL intimated the concerned dealer to refund the amount to the customer and got the stamped money receipt obtained by the dealer from the customer along with copy of the dealers refund cheque. (e) On receipt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. 172/2000 dt 14-6-2000 Oct to Dec 98 287821.00 8. 173/2000 dt 14/6/00 Jan 99 258127.00 9. 170/2000 dt 14-6-2000 July to Sept 98 358901.00 10. 140/2000 dt 14-6-2000 Nov 98 386755.00 11. 169/2000 dt 14-6-2000 April May 98 247832.00 12. 168/2000 dt 12-6-2000 Nov 98 499319.00 13. 207/2000 dt 7-7-2000 Jan Feb 99 477342.00 14. 176/2000 dt 13-6-2000 Dec 98 410414.00 15. 239/2000 dt 31-8-2000 Feb March 99 408899.00 16. 237/2000 dt 31-8-2000 March 99 138723.00 17. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said cheques from taxi owners who were gullible enough to give the same without actually getting the cheque. These false/bogus receipts were also obtained to facilitate M/s. Fiat India Ltd. to file the refund claims. (iii) M/s. Fiat India Ltd. were well aware of the fact that the cheques were never handed over to the taxi owners by the respective dealers and they also knew about the bogus receipts obtained from the taxi owners. They, notwithstanding above facts, submitted the refund claims with the Department along with these bogus document i.e. photocopies of the cheques and receipts to get the refund claim sanctioned. And since the documents on the basis of which the refund claims were sanctioned, were forged and manipulated, the ent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade by the manufacturer in form R prescribed under Rule 173S of Central Excise Rules, 1944 along with evidence of registration of the Motor Vehicle as Taxi by any person and of heving effected Return of the excess amount to the buyer of the manufacturer. The noticeable amendement, vide notification 5/98 dt 1-6-98 which eliminated the production of evidence of the excess amount having been refunded to the actual person in whose name the motor vehicle was registered as a Taxi and the requirement of only having made a return to the buyer of the manufacturer cannot be ignored. 2.2 In the case before us, there is proof of Return of the excess amounts to the buyers of Fiat i.e. PAL. The material of production of photocopies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
