9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 213X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... converted into seat covers i.e., work in progress. The Adjudicating Authority has recorded a factual finding that the raw materials were damaged at the stock godown and not in the factory premises of the assessee. As the assessee failed to establish that the inputs were used in the production or partly used in the production, the question of availing Cenvat Credit on those goods, which was said to have been damaged, does not arise. Therefore, as rightly held by the Original Authority, the Cenvat Credit has to be reversed by the assessee, moreso, when they were unable to produce any documents to show that those goods were used for production or partly used in the production i.e., work in progress. Even before the first Appellate Authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... favour of Revenue. - C.M.A.Nos.1141 & 1142 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 10-1-2014 - Chitra Venkataraman And T. S. Sivagnanam,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. P. Mahadevan SCCG For the Respondent : No Appearance JUDGMENT (The Judgment of the Court was made by T. S. Sivagnanam, J.) These appeals by the Revenue are directed against the common order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) bearing Final Order No.980 981 of 2009, dated 14.08.2009 in E.No.124/2007 and E.No.200/2007, dated 14.08.2007 and the appeals have been admitted on the following substantial question of law:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the second respondent Tribunal is correct in passing the Fina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of credit of the duty availed on the inputs; have deliberately suppressed these facts with an intent to evade payment of duty and therefore, the extended power of limitation under proviso to sub section (i) of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, (Act) read with Rules 12 and 13 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001 is invoked. It was further stated that the assessee had contravened the erstwhile Rule 57AB of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 38A of Act and Rule 3 of Cenvat Credit Rules,2001 and 2002 inasmuch as they had consciously availed the Cenvat Credit on inputs which were not used in the manufacture of final products. The assessee was called upon to explain as to why the wrongly availed credit should not be disallowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment of duty. Accordingly, the proposal in the show cause notice was confirmed and the credit of Rs.3,03,131/- was disallowed and the penalty equivalent to the said amount was imposed along with interest as applicable. Aggrieved by such order, the assessee preferred appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) by order dated 31.10.2006, observed that the assessee could not produce any evidence in addition to what they have produced before the Adjudicating Authority and thus having failed to prove that the goods were in work in progress, confirmed the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority, however, waived the penalty without assigning any specific reasons. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee as well as the Revenue pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cating Authority has recorded a factual finding that the raw materials were damaged at the stock godown and not in the factory premises of the assessee. As the assessee failed to establish that the inputs were used in the production or partly used in the production, the question of availing Cenvat Credit on those goods, which was said to have been damaged, does not arise. Therefore, as rightly held by the Original Authority, the Cenvat Credit has to be reversed by the assessee, moreso, when they were unable to produce any documents to show that those goods were used for production or partly used in the production i.e., work in progress. Even before the first Appellate Authority, the assessee were not able to produce any material to prove th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue preferred appeal as against this order to the Tribunal, the Tribunal by a non-speaking order without assigning any reasons confirmed the order passed by the first Appellate Authority by merely observing that the order passed by the first Appellate Authority is reasonable and has been passed taking into account the entire circumstances of the case. We are unable to subscribe to the manner in which, the Tribunal had dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue while confirming the order passed by the first Appellate Authority. When the Original Authority had clearly recorded a finding that the conduct of the assessee was with an intention to evade payment of duty, the penal provisions stand attracted and penalty is imposable. 10. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
