9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1475X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he invoices. The appellant has also not specifically provided any evidence to counter the allegation of the Central Excise Department that the disputed goods have been received by it and supplied to the buyers, entitling them to take cenvat credit - imposition of penalty justified - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Excise Appeal No. E/50843/2014 -Ex[SM] - FINAL ORDER No. 54087 /20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the same from the manufacturer M/s V K Metal Works. The appellant sold such brass pipes to its customers under cover of 10 numbers of Central Excise invoices. There was a preventive search in the factory of the M/s V K Metal Works wherein it was observed by the Central Excise Authorities that the said manufacturer does not have any capacity to manufacture of brass pipes. On the basis of the inve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Department has not specifically alleged that the goods covered under the disputed invoices were not brass pipes, which were received by the appellant. He further submits that since the appellant had received brass pipes under the cover of proper valid documents from the first stage dealer M/s Rachna Metal Industries and supplied the same to the ultimate consignee, imposition of penalty invokin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the facts and in the circumstances of the present case is justified, the Ld. DR relies on the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian Special Castings (P) Ltd. vs CCE reported in 2010 (225) ELT 844 (SC) and the Judgment of Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of Ayushi Steel Company (P) Ltd. vs Commissioner reported in 2012 (285) ELT A18 (P H). 4. I have heard the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
