9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uced in investigation that the appellant has received invoices, not the goods. On the contrary, the statement of the second stage dealer to whom the appellant has issued invoices in his statement categorically admitted that they have received the goods from the appellant against the duty paid which were sold to the manufacturing buyer who already admitted that he has received the goods. Therefore/ the statement of the second stage dealer and manufacturing buyer supposed the case of the appellant and in the absence of any statement of the appellant now the question arises why the statement of the appellant was not recorded during the course of investigation. Therefore, I conclude that investigation against the appellant is incomplete. - pena ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irector, thereof was also recorded who, inter-alia, admitted that they have received the goods against the invoices issued by M/s. Malik Sons and Cosmos Steel. But to buy peace, M/s. Jainsons Engineering Limited reverse the CENVAT Credit availed on the invoices in dispute. Thereafter, show cause notice was issued to the appellant to impose penalty under Rule 26 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 for selling and purchasing of the goods in dispute without physical delivery of the goods. Both the lower authorities imposed penalty on the appellant. 3. Aggrieved from the said order, appellant is before me. 4. Ld. counsel for the appellant submits that in this case, neither any statement of appellant is recorded nor any summons have been issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot manufactured any goods during the impugned period, only issued invoice. Therefore, question arises from where the appellant procured the goods. Therefore, it is clear inference from the circumstances of the case that the invoices which have been issued the appellant are covered the goods which have not been sold by M/s. Khemka Ispat Ltd. to appellant. Therefore, CENVAT Credit cannot be transferred to the second stage dealer as appellant has issued the invoice without the goods covered under the said invoices issued by the manufacturing supplier. Therefore, penalty on the appellant has rightly imposed under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 as they have received invoices without receiving the goods and issued invoices without sell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
