9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 362X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944, in view of the observation of the Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of CCE Vs Harish Silk Mills [2010 (2) TMI 494 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] and CCE Vs G.P.Presstress Concrete Works [2012 (8) TMI 933 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]. Accordingly, the appeal is remanded to the Adjudicating authority to consider the option of payment of 25% of the penalty on fulfillment of the conditions laid down under Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944. - Decided partly in favour of assessee - Appeal No. E/12073/2013-SM - Order No. A/10835/2016 - Dated:- 31-8-2016 - Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial) For the Appellant: Shri K.C. Rathod, Consultant For the Respondent: Shri N. Satwani, A.R. ORDER Per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contention that the denial of CENVAT Credit alleging that the input invoices on which the credit availed was old and was pertaining to period prior to 3-4 months, cannot be sustained. 5. Per contra, the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue submitted that after due verification by the Department, from the total claim of ₹ 1,35,133/- no evidence could be placed before the Adjudicating authority on receipt of the inputs involving credit of ₹ 61,953/-. The Adjudicating authority has recorded a finding that out of the total quantity of raw material consumed, approximately 90% of it was non-cenvatable, therefore, the Appellants could not establish that the quantity of inputs not found were against cenvatable invoices. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... obtained Central Excise registration on 14.03.2011 and intimated regarding the availment of CENVAT Credit of ₹ 1,35,133/- on inputs lying in stock and inputs contained in the finished goods at the time of obtaining registration. During the course of verification of stock position of inputs as on 14.03.2011 and the month wise account for the year 2010-11, it has been observed that a credit of ₹ 61,953/- availed on some of the stock of inputs declared by the Appellant were not found in stock as on 14.03.2011. As per sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, CENVAT Credit of duty paid on inputs contained in final products lying in stock only. I find that, the Appellant have not furnished any such concrete evidence in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
