9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 540X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... found a shortage of 35,500 kgs. of Diphenyl Methane Di-Isocyanate (MDI). The credit involved on the raw material found short was Rs. 6,65,161/- and the same was paid by debiting Rs. 6,52,780/- on 5-9-99 in RG23A Part II and paying the balance Rs. 12,381/- through PLA on 18-9-95. (b) Shri Dilipbhai Mehta, Director of the respondent company, in his statement dt. 5-9-95, stated that they have imported 38,000/- kgs. of MDI through M/s. National Small Industries Corpn. (NSIC) Ltd. and taken entire credit of Rs. 7,12,003/- and but received only 2,500 kgs. of raw material by the date the officers visited the factory and utilized the credit to the tune of Rs. 59,222/-. (c) By a letter dt. 17-10-95 addressed to the Asst. Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... outside the factory in the company owned godown, then there was no ground or justification for holding them working as if with culpable mental state. Everyone is not well-versed with the provisions of laws, rules and procedures which are quite technical and cumbersome so in late eighties and early nineties. I must notice that the provisions for imposing penalty are not a toy pistol, it could be lethal. The adjudicating authority had treated the penal provisions like toy pistol. The Asstt. Commissioner-in-charge of the Division has ordered the availment of the credit was in order and merely for procedural lapse the credit which was otherwise available cannot be looted by the Revenue. In fact, under the provisions of Rule 210 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons are highly provocative and totally unwarranted. It is not in dispute that on the day of visit by the officers they had already taken the entire credit on 38,000 kgs. of imported material, but they had physically received 2,500 kgs only. Hence, the officers raising the dispute and taking a view that they were not eligible for the credit might be erroneous, but by no stretch of imagination, could be considered as a mala fide action. In fact, the learned Authorized Representative submitted that they had at no point of time made any submission of mala fide action by the departmental officers. Under these circumstances, it is not understood as to why such harsh remarks should be made by the Commissioner (Appeals) against the investigating of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
