2010 (8) TMI 560

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... terial. During the search of their factory premises and physical stock verification, certain shortages of raw materials were detected. In his on the spot statement, General Manager of the appellant company revealed that the said raw material is lying in the factory premises of their sister unit due to shortage of space in their premises on account of rainy season. The fact is that the said POY was found in the premises of their sister concern. The appellant company, however, debited the credit so availed by them on the date of visit itself. Subsequently, proceedings were initiated against them for confirmation of Modvat amount on the ground that the appellant had cleared the input on which they have taken Modvat Credit, without reversal of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... there under are not legally sustainable. Under the facts discussed above, I hereby set aside the impugned order-in-original and allow the appeal. The stay application stands disposed off accordingly." 3. Accordingly, the appellants contended that the ownership of the goods by M/s. Shubhlaxmi Syntex Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Shubhlaxmi Dyetex Pvt. Ltd. has not been disputed by the Revenue, in which case, it only remains a question of procedural lapse. Had they intimated their jurisdictional Central Excise authority and sought their permission to store the input temporarily in the premises of their sister unit, no duty liability would have arisen against them. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) has observed in his impugned order that the ab .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... E.L.T. 877 (Tribunal) and M/s. Neer Shree Cement v. CCE, Jaipur, wherein in similar facts and circumstances, the Tribunal accepted the appellant's stand that primarily removal and storage of the raw material in the adjacent premises of the appellant's sister unit was not amounting to removal of the same without reversal of credit. Such inputs were duly accounted for by the appellant in their statutory record and as such, they were under a legal obligation to show consumption of the same. As such, to conclude that they were removing the goods with mala fide intention, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, would not be in the interest of justice. 5. In view of the above, I set aside the impugned order and allow all the appeal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X