9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1052X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tlal Shah has played key role in helping M/s. Real Terminal Engineering Works (India) Pvt. Ltd. to avail inadmissible cenvat credit in contravention of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. It is pertinent to note that the appellant is a proprietorship concern and it is unlikely that the activities of Shri Jaswantlal Shah is not in the knowledge of the appellant. Therefore, keeping in view all the facts and circumstances and the evidence on record, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order. However, I feel that the imposition of penalty of ₹ 1,25,000/- is on a higher side and, therefore, I reduce it to ₹ 50,000 - Decided partly in favour of appellant. - APPEAL No. E/1186/10-Mum - - - Dated:- 4-12-2015 - Hon ble Mr. S.S. Garg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... central excise invoices of M/s. Annapurna Impex Pvt. Ltd. through Shri Ashok Bafna and Shri Arvind Jain, where they used locally available scrap to manufacture the mother tubes on job work basis and supplied the same to M/s. Real Terminal Engineering Works (India) Pvt. Ltd. and for that the appellant used to get cheques from M/s. Real Terminal Engineering Works (India) Pvt. Ltd. in favour of M/s. Annapurna Impex Pvt. Ltd. In reply to the show cause notice, the appellant submitted that they have not played any role to assist or avail fraudulent cenvat credit by M/s. Real Terminal Engineering Works (India) Pvt. Ltd. and hence the appellant pleaded that no penalty can be imposed on them under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The adj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... handed over to them with central excise invoices for copper ingots and copper wire bars of M/s. Annapurna Impex Pvt. Ltd. The copper scrap was directly received by the appellant from M/s. Annapurna Impex Pvt. Ltd. and the same was never received by M/s. Real Terminal Engineering Works (India) Pvt. Ltd. The learned counsel further submitted that a perusal of the above statement clearly shows that the appellant is not beneficiary in the entire transaction. The appellant had only issued invoices for job work charges in respect of the job work done on inputs received from M/s. Real Terminal Engineering Works (India) Pvt. Ltd. and the same was paid to the appellant by cheque by the principal manufacturer. He further submitted that the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inadmissible cenvat credit. Though the appellant states that Shri Jaswantlal Shah has helped M/s. Real Terminal Engineering Works (India) Pvt. Ltd. in availing inadmissible cenvat credit, but he has done so in his individual capacity and has nothing to do with the appellant. This submission is devoid of merit keeping in view the evidence on record. Both the authorities below have held that Shri Jaswantlal Shah has played key role in helping M/s. Real Terminal Engineering Works (India) Pvt. Ltd. to avail inadmissible cenvat credit in contravention of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. It is pertinent to note that the appellant is a proprietorship concern and it is unlikely that the activities of Shri Jaswantlal Shah is not in the knowledge of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
