9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1941X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a ground for denial of credit to M/s. Aravali who actually received the inputs under the cover of proper invoices issued by Suren Metals. - Revenue during the course of investigation, recorded statement of various owners/drivers of the trucks as also of transport agencies. Though all of them deposed to the effect that they have actually loaded the goods from Vasant Kunj and delivered the same at Bahadurgarh factory of M/s. Aravali. One proprietor of M/s. Sharma Transport Service, Shri Ram Prakash Sharma denied such movement in respect of 5 invoices. For the balance invoices, he accepted the transportation of the goods from Vasant Kunj to Bahadurgarh. Shri Ramchander owner of the trucks involved, also denied having transported the goods - Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the party proceedings were initiated against them. 3. From the above, it is clear that the Revenue is not disputing the dispatch of the goods or the receipt of the same by M/s. Aravali. The only objection of the Revenue is that M/s. Suren Metal was registered at their Gurgaon address whereas they were dispatching the goods from their Vasant Kunj office. 4. Learned Advocate has explained that M/s. Suren Metal was procuring the aluminum scrap from one M/s. Suren International Pvt. Ltd. who was importing the same. Instead of bringing the goods first to their Gurgaon office, the same were dispatched directly from Vasant Kunj office of M/s. Suren International. It is their contention that in the absence of any evidence to the contrary ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rther, there is no evidence corroborating the above fact. M/s. Aravali has received the inputs, entered the same in their RG-23A Part I and have utilized the same in the manufacture of their final products which stand cleared by them on payment of duty. There is no other alternative source, shown by the Revenue for procurement of said inputs. As such, I find that the Revenue cannot build up its case on the oral submission of transporter, driver or owner of the truck without producing any other corroboratory evidence to substantiate the allegation. 8. In view of the above, I find no merits in the impugned orders and same are accordingly set aside and all the appeals are allowed with consequential relief to the appellants. (Pronounced i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
