9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 333X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the registered dealer. The statement of the appellants representative recorded during the course of investigation is exculpatory in nature and they have nowhere accepted the fact of having knowledge about non-payment of duty by M/s. Sulabh Impex Corpn. Transporters billty indicating receipt of inputs stand produced by them. In such a case, the declaration of law of Luxmi Metal Industries [2013 (3) TMI 143 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] is fully applicable to the facts of the present case. - Even on the ground of period of limitation, the case is in favor of assessee - Demand set aside - Decided in favor of assessee. - Appeal No. 1970 of 2009 -Ex[SM] - ORDER NO. FO/ 51671/2014- (SM) - Dated:- 22-4-2014 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J. For the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mposed as penalty. The said order of the original adjudicating authority was upheld by Commissioner (Appeals). 4. The appellant s contention, duly represented by advocate Shri Hemant Bajaj, is that there is no dispute about the fact of procurement of goods by the appellant from two registered dealers. Further, there is also no dispute that the invoices issued by the said registered dealers gave all the particulars required to be given in the invoices and based upon the same, the appellant had availed the credit. The inputs so received by the appellant stand duly recorded in their statutory records. They have paid the entire consideration for the inputs including the duty element, as is evidenced from their books of accounts and bank stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out non-payment of duty by M/s. Sulabh Impex Corpn. Transporters billty indicating receipt of inputs stand produced by them. In such a case, the declaration of law of Luxmi Metal Industries is fully applicable to the facts of the present case. 8. The Tribunal in the case of CC CE Kanpur vs Juhi Alloys [2013 (296) ELT 533 (Tri-Del)] has held that Cenvat credit cannot be denied to the manufacturer on the ground that registered dealer has procured the goods fraudulently without payment of duty. The said decision of the Tribunal stand upheld by the Hon ble High Court when the appeal filed by the Revenue was rejected vide order dated 15.1.2014. To the same effect is the Tribunal s decision in the case of R S Industries vs. CCE, New Delhi [2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
