9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 486X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m unearthed in Surat regarding fraudulent rebate claims where the exporters had submitted bogus bills and documents. It was stated that during the investigation of fraudulent rebate claim cases, other modus operandi was also detected. It was noticed that number of persons who had obtained registrations as manufacturers had issued various central excise duty paying invoices without any movement of goods and in fact no goods were sold by them. It was, therefore, stated that as per the Department, the petitioner had purchased the goods from various firms which were either declared fake or had purchased the goods from fake, bogus or non-existent firms. The petitioner was, therefore, put to notice why the rebate claim of Rs. 14,49,000/- should n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case, the petitioner had not taken any reasonable steps before taking credit. It was noticed that the invoice issued by Gajanand Textiles, Jagruti Textiles and Poonam Dyeing & Printing Mills and Qaswa Textiles were fake and fictitious and simply paper transactions to facilitate the petitioner to avail Cenvat credit for the duty described in the invoices which was not at all paid previously. It was, in short, held that the credit was claimed on the strength of fake invoices of the above suppliers. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the adjudicating authority, the petitioner approached the appellate authority. The Appellate Commissioner, dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order of the adjudicating authority making following observations ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts provide authority for the preposition that technical and procedural infractions should not come in the way of grant of rebate. The case in hand involves procurements from fictitious person under Central Excise invoices written by unknown person. The citation quoted by the appellant have no bearing on the issue in hand. It is not a simple case of removal of processed fabric for export on payment of duty. It is necessary to examine the facts in totality. As per records grey fabrics are shown procured from M/s. Hari Enterprise, a fictitious person. The supplier of grey fabrics is fictitious and the documents (invoices) are fraudulent. The whole transaction starting with procurements of grey fabrics upto clearances of export goods is vitiate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pears to be created on paper for availing rebate claims fraudulently. The applicant facilitated the availment of wrong credit by processor on the basis of bogus invoices of grey fabrics endorsed by him. The duty paid out of such wrongly availed Cenvat credit can not be treated as payment of duty on export goods as no actual Cenvat credit was available. As such the rebate claim is not admissible under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. 9. Applicant had been pleading that goods are exported and duty was paid and he made the payment by cheque to the suppliers of grey fabrics so rebate cannot be denied. In this regard, it is observed that unless and until duty paid character of exported goods is proved the rebate cannot granted. The c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of this Court in the case of Commissioner of C. Ex. & Customs v. D.P. Singh - 2011 (270) E.L.T. 321 (Guj.). 8. Having thus heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the documents on record, we are of the opinion that the authorities have examined the case in detail and no interference is called for. Firstly, several issues of facts have been gone into, examined and conclusions have been arrived at on the basis of evidence on record. Such conclusions are not pointed out to be perverse. No interference in exercise of powers under Article 226/227 of the Constitution, therefore, can be made. 9. Basically the issue is whether the petitioner had purchased the inputs which were duty paid. It may be true that the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under law to ensure that the goods were duty paid. In fact, the Commissioner of Appeals and the Government, both had held on facts that M/s. Roman Overseas had taken all necessary care. It was on this background that this Court held that the rebate claim was rightly granted by the Appellate Authority and the Revisional Authority. 11. In the present case, facts are different. The petitioner had claimed to have purchased inputs from suppliers who are found to be fake. The petitioner cannot take shelter that it had no knowledge or claim total innocence. In fact, the Appellate Authority, in connection with the existence of M/s. Hari Enterprise noted that said Hari Enterprise took registration on 10th December, 2003 and surrendered the sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
