9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 486X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed by M/s S. K. Garg & Sons which were accepted by the department. Therefore, in the absence of any corroborative evidence to show that the appellants have not received the goods, it cannot be alleged against the appellant that they have received the invoices and not the goods. The same issue was decided by this Tribunal in the case of CCE, Ludhiana vs. M/s Dhawan Steel Industries [2015 (10) TMI 1325 - CESTAT NEW DELHI]. Therefore, by relying on the same, it is held that in the absence of any investigation at the end of manufacturer/supplier or the transporter, the cenvat credit cannot be denied to the appellants. - Decided in favour of appellant - Appeal Nos. 3329, 3331, 3334/2010, Appeal No. E/1878/2011-SM, Appeal No. E/53236/2015-SM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y have received the invoices but not the goods. In these set of facts various show cause notices issued to the appellants to deny cenvat credit on inputs procured on the strength of the invoices issued by M/s S. K. Garg Sons. Consequently, duty was proposes to be demanded alongwith interest and penalty was sought to be imposed. The matters were adjudicated, cenvat credit was denied consequently duty was demanded alongwith interest and equal amount of penalty. Aggrieved from the said orders appellant are before me. 3. As issue involved in all these appeals is common therefore all the appeals are taken up together for disposal by common order. 4. Ld. Counsels appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that there is no inculpatory ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the submissions. 6. I find that in the matter in hand no investigation conducted at the end of manufacturer/ supplier or the transporter to reveal the truth whether manufacturer/ supplier has supplied the goods in question to M/s S. K. Garg Sons or the transporter has transported the goods to the premises of the appellants which is vital evidence to reveal the truth. Further, M/s S. K. Garg Sons was registered dealer during the impugned period and all the ST-3 returns were filed by M/s S. K. Garg Sons which were accepted by the department. Therefore, in the absence of any corroborative evidence to show that the appellants have not received the goods, it cannot be alleged against the appellant that they have received the invoices an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
