9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt procured goods from one M/s S.K. Garg & Sons who is a first stage dealer who got registered with the department w.e.f. 05.12.2003. An investigation was conducted at the premises of M/s S.K. Garg & Sons on 14.08.2007, it was found that the premises was locked and godown is also non-existence. Enquiries were made with the landlord who stated that M/s S.K. Garg & Sons has vacated the premises in 2003 itself and thereafter he never let out the premises to anybody. On the basis of investigation and on the basis of statement of M/s S.K. Garg & Sons the registration of M/s S.K. Garg & Sons was cancelled on 21.07.2008 retrospectively. Further investigation revealed that the appellants before me have procured goods from M/s S.K. Garg & Sons and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heir contention ld. Counsel also relied on the decision of CCE, Ludhiana Vs. Dhawan Steel Industries- 2015 (324) ELT 169 (Tri. Del.) & Jiwan Singh Girdhari Lal vide Final Order No. 338-342/2016-CHD dated 28.04.2016. 4. On the other hand, Ld. DR oppose the contentions of the Ld. Counsels and submits that in this case the preventive officers of the Central Excise department visited the premises of M/s S.K. Garg & Sons on 13.08.2007 and it was found that M/s S.K. Garg & Sons is non-existence. The investigation was started and alter on it was revealed that as M/s S.K. Garg & Sons is engaged in issuing of the fake cenvatable invoices for availment of the cenvat credit by the appellants, in fact, no godown was in existence where the goods to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Sons giving details of transpor6ters as well as manufacturer supplier of the goods. No investigation was conducted at the end of manufacturer supplier as well as transporter of the goods to reveal the truth. The case has been made against the respondents on the presumption that supplier dealer is not existing firm therefore, there was only paper transaction. Cases cannot be booked merely on the presumption and assumption, there should be corroborative evidence to prove the allegations. In this case, allegation has not been supported with tangible evidence. Therefore, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly set aside the proceedings against the respondents. In these circumstances, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
