9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 699X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods. Hence, in my opinion, confirmation of duty/Cenvat demand, without proper evidence, is not legal and appropriate. Further, in view of the fact that the appellant has maintained adequate records to demonstrate receipt of the disputed goods under the cover of valid and proper duty paid documents, the charges leveled against the appellant for taking fraudulent credit is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Thus, I am of the view that confirmation of the cenvat demand, imposition of penalty by the Authorities below are liable to be set aside. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Excise Appeal No. E/59182/2013 -Ex[SM] - FINAL ORDER NO. 51474 /2015 - Dated:- 26-5-2015 - Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) For the Respondent : Mr. N K S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rintendent, the appellant has stated that though the cenvat credit amounting to ₹ 1,04,102/- has been reversed from the cenvat credit account, but the appellant deserves the right to contest the matter in appeal. Subsequently, Show Cause Proceedings were initiated against the appellant, seeking recovery of irregularly availed cenvat credit and the same were culminated in the Adjudication Order dated 5.6.2012 wherein, besides confirming the Cenvat demand, an equal amount of penalty has been imposed on the appellant. Further, interest amounting to ₹ 65,312/- has also been confirmed in the said order. Feeling aggrieved with the said Adjudication order, the appellant had preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent reiterated the findings recorded in the impugned order to justify confirmation of the duty demand and imposition of penalty. 4. The short question involved in this appeal for determination by this Tribunal is, as to whether, the duty liability can be fastened on the appellant on the alleged ground that the goods covered under the invoices issued by the second stage dealer has not been received in the factory. 5. I find that the Revenue-Respondent had relied upon certain statements recorded from outside parties to substantiate the allegation that the goods have not been received in the factory of the appellant. In this context, statements recorded from Shri Rupesh Bansal, Proprietor of M/s Bhagwati Trading Co. are relevant for s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
