9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 464X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... E.L.T.. 393 is not relevant to the present case as the issue involved is quite different. Para 8 of the order reads as follows : 8. The appellant has referred to the decision of Tribunal in the case of Mangalam Enterprises v. C.C.E. - 2003(159)E.L.T. 393 (Tri.-Mum), in his defence. However the cited case is not relevant here, as the issue involved was different. In the Mangalam Enterprises case, the department had disallowed credit on inputs which were not directly received into the factory of the manufacturer and had come via their various godowns, where they were stored for some time. In the cited case, the assessee had taken credit on inputs when they were received in the factory, unlike the case of the appellant, where the credit w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he reasons given by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in his order, it was contended that Mangalam Enterprises (supra) ratio is also not applicable here. 4. We have heard both sides and perused the record. It is apparent that the applicant has availed credit in respect of goods which were not actually received by them into their factory on the crucial into their factory date of taking such credit. The appellant has casually shown receipt of goods in their factory giving one or two days from the date of removal of the goods knowing fully well that the provisions under the law being violated deliberately. It also appears impossible in view of the distance of 2000 kms. from Samba (J K) to the factory of noticee at Betul. Thus, the contraventi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plication and it was only a matter of few days delay and had the Department been aggrieved, they could have been maximum charged interest for this period from the appellant. All these points, however, remain to be fully answered by the Revenue. However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, prima facie, it appears that there is a clear violation of the provisions on the part of the appellant which has injured the interest of the Revenue. We are employing the word interest here not only in the monetary sense, but also in the sense of contributing to an objective . In view of this, we direct the appellant to deposit a sum equivalent to 50% of the duty demanded under the impugned order within six weeks from today, failing w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
