9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 603X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal No. E/577/08, Shri. Vatsal Bhanusali, Advocate for Appeals No. E/604 TO 606/08, Shri. Vinod Awtani, C.A. for Appeals No. E/611 TO 613/08 for the Appellants Shri. V.K. Agarwal, Addl. Commissioner(A.R.) for the Respondent ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair These appeals are directed against Order-in-Original No. 6/CEX/08 dated 25-2-2008 passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Nashik whereby Ld. Commissioner confirmed demand of Rs. 76,41, 216/- towards wrongly availed credit by M/s. Bhavshakti Steelmines Pvt Ltd. Bifurcation of demand is as under: Sr. No. Annexure No CE duty Duty demand of account of 1. Annexure-I 44,03,266/- Physical shortage of 3233.125 MT of scrap 2. Annexure-II 12,50,305/- CENVAT availed on CE i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... artment that they were not receiving the scrap mentioned in the invoice. They are using bazar scrap as and when required. The detailed investigation was carried out by the investigation agency with various persons who issued the invoices such as manufacturers, registered dealers, investigation was also carried with the transporter and RTO office wherein it was revealed that vehicle mentioned in the invoices are not goods carrying vehicle but either auto rickshaw, scooter, motor cycle. This shows that invoices issued but the goods were not transported under the said invoices. Investigation was also carried out with the RTO and it was found that vehicle in respect of HR trimming scrap issued by dealer of Ispat Industries were transported to V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecision Transcore Inds. Ltd (j) Penalty of Rs. 3,00,000/- on M/s. National Lamination Inds. (k) Penalty of Rs. 3,00,000/-on M/s. Alfa Lamination Being aggrieved by the impugned order, appellant filed these appeals. 2. None appeared on behalf of M/s. Bhavshakti Steelmines Pvt Ltd, However letter of adjournment from the advocate was placed on record. It is noticed that this matter has been adjournened numbers of time therefore no further adjournment can be given. Moreover in respect of most of the appellants Counsels are presents therefore we have taken up the matter for disposal. Now from the appeal of M/s. Bhavshakti Steelmines Pvt Ltd preliminary submission is that they were not supplied all the relied upon/non relied upon document ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the artificial person such as company. Following judgments were relied upon: (a) Commr. of Central Excise Vs. Ramesh Kumar Rajendra Kumar &Co.[2015(325)ELT 506(Bom)] (b) Ispat Industries Ltd Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. & Cus., Aurangabad[2008(226)ELT 218(Tri. Mumbai)] (c) Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. M/s. Bansal Steel Corporation and Ors[2017-TIOL-1883-HC-MUM-CX] (d) Nicholas D Souza Garage Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. Thane[2015(320)ELT 579(Tri. Mumbai)] (e) Vishal Shah Vs. Commissioner of C. ex. Thane-II[2007(210)ELT 125(Tri. Mum)] (f) Kamdeep Marketing Pvt ltd Vs. Commissioner of Ex. Indore[2004(165)ELT 206(Tri. Del)] (g) Manek Chemicals Pvt ltd Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex. Ahmedabad[2002(145) ELT 335(TRI. Del)] (h) Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CCE, Thane-I[CESTAT WZB Order No. A/204-215/14/EB/ C-II dated 8-1-2014] (c) Harisons Steel Pvt Ltd Vs. Union of India & Ors[2017-TIOL-803-HC-MUM-CX] (d) Ajay Kumar G. Baheti Vs. CCE, & Cus., Nashik[2017(348)ELT 115(Tri. Mumbai)] (e) Nashik Strips Pvt Ltd Vs. CCE, Nashik[2010(256)ELT 307(Tri. Mumbai)] 5. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused the records. 6. We find that though the adjudicating authority has tried his best to comply with principle of natural justice and granted number of opportunity of personal hearing and also allowed the cross examination but the fact remains that appellant have not received all the relied upon documents, the cross examination of the witnesses could not be cond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all also be deemed to be concluded.] [(2) Any person, who issues- (i) an excise duty invoice without delivery of the goods specified therein or abets in making such invoice; or (ii) any other document or abetsin making such document, on the basis of which the user of said invoice or document is likely to take or has taken any ineligible benefit under the Act or the rules made there under like claiming of CENVAT credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 or refund, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding the amount of such benefit or five thousand rupees, whichever is greater.] From the plain reading of the above Rule, as per the act/role prescribed under Rule 26, it is not possible to carry out such acts/play role by artificial pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
