9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 361X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same has been entered in their RG-23 Register. Therefore, the burden cast on the revenue to prove that this is only a paper transaction and goods have not been received by the appellant at all. To ascertain this fact that appellant has not received the goods, the statement of transporter is very much relevant to find out the truth. The charge against the appellant that they have not received goods and it was only the paper transaction is not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eels against invoices wherein the manufacturer is not M/s. Jai Kara Steel Rolling Mills. Therefore, on the basis of investigation conducted at the end of M/s. Jai Kara Steel Rolling Mills and concluding that as dealer is not existent demand is not sustainable. As they have received the goods in their factory under the cover of duty paid invoices which shows the manufacturer and supplier of the goods and they have paid the amount against this invoices through cheque, therefore, without conducting investigation at the end of transporter and manufacturer supplier or physical verification of the stock, the demand is not sustainable. To support this contentions he relied on the decision of Telson Mill Final Order No. 976/2012-SMV, dated 17-7-201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ara Steel Rolling Mills where they came out with the information that they are selling goods through M/s. Jyoti Steels. Thereafter, investigation was conducted at the premises of M/s. Jyoti Steels which was found non-existent and having no godown. In these set of facts, it is concluded against the appellant on the basis of the statement of proprietor of M/s. Jyoti Steels and authorized representative of appellant that appellant has procured invoice not physically any goods. Therefore, Cenvat credit was denied. In this case, I find that the manufacturer supplier of the goods is not M/s. Jai Kara Steel Rolling Mills at all. No investigation has been conducted by the Revenue at the end of manufacturer supplier against whose invoices the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... apital goods or input service or the input service distributor distributing Cenvat credit on input service on the basis of, invoice, bill or, as the case may be, challan received by him for distribution of input service credit shall be deemed to have taken reasonable steps if he satisfies himself about the identity and address of the manufacturer or supplier or provider of input service, as the case may be, issuing the documents specified in sub-rule (1), evidencing the payment of excise duty or the additional duty of customs or Service Tax, as the case may be, either- (a) from his personal knowledge; or (b) on the basis of a certificate given by a person with whose handwriting or signature he is familiar; or (c) on the basis of a c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... supplier has supplied the goods to the appellant through the registered dealer or not. In this case, the ld. AR relied on two case laws. First in the case of Sidh Industries (supra), the said case law is not relevant to the facts of that case as in that case the issue was of penalty on the registered dealer. In fact in this case appellant is not the registered dealer. He is the manufacturer/buyer of the goods. Therefore, the said case is of no help to the revenue. Further, in the case of Neelkanth Steel and Agro Industries (supra) the observation of this Tribunal in that case is that the manufacturer has not produced any evidence. But in this case, the appellant has produced invoice on the strength of which they have availed Cenvat credit a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
