9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 1159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to the assessee merely, on the ground that at the time of investigation, the dealer was non-existent. In fact when the goods were procured by the assessee, the dealer was registered with the department. In these circumstances, no merit in the revenue's appeal - appeal rejected - CENVAT credit allowed - decided in favor of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see, the revenue is in appeal. 3. As both the appeals are arising for the common order therefore, both the appeals are taken up together for disposal. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that in this case the demand has been confirmed against them only on the ground that the dealer who has supplied the goods to the assessee was found to be non-existent during investigation. At the time when the dealer issued the invoice, the dealer was having registration from the department and it is the duty of the revenue to verify whether the dealer having godown/office for registration with the department. As the dealer was having registration in that circumstances, it is concluded that the revenue has examined the office/godown premises of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . A/ 54432/2014 dated 29-10.2014. In support of the revenue appeal, he submits that after transit sale the manufacturer supplier have to enter the name of the assessee in the invoice and name of the dealer as shown is separately as dealer. In transit sale, the dealer cannot issue the invoice. Therefore, the Ld. Commissioner (A) has felt an error for allowing the credit. 6. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 7. On careful consideration of the facts of the case, I find that the facts of this case are similar to the case of M/s Accurate Auto Product Ltd. (Supra) wherein the facts are as under: Para 2. The facts of the case are that an investigation was conducted against the supplier of the goods, Shri Sachin Aggravanshi, for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s denied confirming the allegation that goods were not moved only invoices were issued. Consequently, demand of duty was confirmed against M/s Accurate Auto Product Pvt. Ltd. along with interest and equivalent amount of penalty was also imposed and equivalent amount of penalty was also imposed on M/s Jitan Steel Industries. Aggrieved from the said facts appellants are before me. 8. In that case, this tribunal after examining the decision of Neelkanth Steel & Agro Industries (Supra) has observes as under: 6. In this case the Ld. AR relied on the decision of M/s Neelkanth Steel & Agro Industries (Supra) to say that cenvat credit is not available. I have gone through the said case. In that case the tribunal has observed as under: "whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e transporter to reveal the truth whether the transporter has transported the goods to the premises of the appellants against the invoices in question, Cenvat credit cannot be denied. Moreover, no enquiry has been done at the end of manufacturer supplier whether they have sold the goods to M/s Sidh Industries (Supra) and transporters thereon. In the absence of these evidences, cenvat credit to the appellant cannot be denied. Therefore, I hold that appellant M/s Accurate Auto Products Pvt. Ltd. has taken cenvat credit correctly. 9. Considering the decision of M/s Accurate Auto Product Pvt. Ltd. (Supra), I find that the facts of this case are similar to the said case and no investigation was conducted at the end of manufacturer supplier/tran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
