9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2209X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the explanation offered by appellant which was supported by documents of stock transfer. In the invoices, being stock transfer, the sale value included all taxes and 10% margin of profit. That therefore, the assessable value in the Bill of Entry is less than the sale value shown in the invoice. A comparable table showing the value in Bill of Entry and value in sale invoice is given. - allegation that value of inputs in invoices did not match with that in Bill of Entry, is baseless. The other allegation is that the inputs stated in these documents did not match description-wise. In the Bill of Entry, the description is given as "gear box". In the sale invoice it is described as a slew gear box, Hoist gear box. Again in Bill of Entry, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inalized in the order dated 9.11.2012 which disallowed the credit. Being aggrieved the appellants filed appeal and vide above impugned order, the same was upheld. Hence this appeal. 2. The learned counsel for appellant advanced his arguments both on merits as well as on the issue of limitation. The period in dispute is 2006-2007 and 2007-2008. Regarding the allegation, the MTC was neither manufactured or cleared by the appellants, it is explained by the learned advocate that after import, the inputs (part of MTC) were stock transferred, from their factory premises at Ballabgarh to their sister concern Palwal Unit. The appellants issued invoices in terms of Rule 3 (5) of the CENVAT Credit Rule and the MTC parts imported were thus transfer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... first ground on which credit is denied is that appellant never manufactured/cleared any MTC. The records did not show any sale of MTC. Therefore, credit was denied on the presumption that inputs were not used in the manufacture of MTC. It is seen from records that appellants have explained in their reply to the show cause notice that the inputs imported were stock transferred under proper invoices to their sister concern at Palwal Unit. Department has no case that appellant's Palwal Unit is not manufacturing/clearing MTC. So, also there is no case that these inputs were diverted or alienated in any manner. I find that authorities below ought to have accepted the explanation offered by appellant which was supported by documents of stock ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
