9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 539X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the manufacturer with proprietor of second stage dealer having deposed that they had in fact supplied to the manufacturer, payment for which were made by them in cheque - Recipient of the inputs is expected to know his immediate supplier and there is no further requirement to find out as to from where his supplier has procured the inputs - Penalties set aside - Following decision of M/s SUPER TRADING COMPANY & OTHERS Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-IV [2013 (10) TMI 491 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. 2022 & 2023 of 2011-EX [SM] - ORDER NO. FO/ 51893-51894 /2014- (SM) - Dated:- 25-4-2014 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, J. For the Appellant : Shri Gagan Kohli, Advocate For the Respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... received the goods from the first stage dealer and having sent the same to M/s. JCBL Ltd. He also produced evidence in the shape of transport documents so as to prove that inputs actually stand delivered and transported to M/s. JCBL. An affidavit to that effect was also filed on record. 4. However, based upon the vague statement of representative of Khemka Ispat Ltd., proceedings were initiated against the appellants resulting in passing of the present impugned orders. Hence, the present appeal. 5. I find that identical issue was the subject matter of Tribunal s decision in the case of M/s. Super Trading Company vs. CCE, Delhi IV [ 2014 (299) ELT 75 (Tri-Del)] wherein the same set of investigations at the end of Khemka Ispat was the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad in fact supplied to the manufacture, payment for which were made by them in cheque, I find no reasons to uphold the findings of the lower authorities that no inputs were actually received by them. There is neither any allegation nor any evidence on record to show that such inputs were procured from some other alternative source. Admittedly, the said appellant could not have manufactured final product, without the receipt of the inputs, in which case revenue findings that no inputs were actually received cannot be upheld. Recipient of the inputs is expected to know his immediately supplier and there is no further requirement to find out as to from where his supplier has procured the inputs. Accordingly, I set aside the confirmation of dem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
