9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 609X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are not conclusive there is nothing on record to show that the appellant have not received the inputs. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Appeal No. E/85847 to 85849/14 & E/85012/14 - A/85317-85320/2018 - Dated:- 20-2-2018 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member ( Judicial ) Shri Ajay Kumar, Addl. Commr. ( A. R. ) for Appellant Shri J. C. Patel, Advocate for respondent ORDER The case of the department is that the respondents have availed Cenvat credit in respect of 800 invoices allegedly without receipt of the goods. In this regard the reliance was placed on the RTO report where the vehicle numbers were found other than the transport vehicles, gate inward register was not maintained and the statements of Shri. Bhojraj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved by respondent. Considering all these facts Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the Order of the Original authority. He further submits that despite having details of suppliers department has not made any inquiry from them. As regard the Octroi report he submits that most of the supplies were made locally therefore there is no question of appearing any details of such consignment in the Octroi records as well as in the RTO records therefore Octroi department also reported that the consignment shown to have been received by the respondent are not matching with the details in the Octroi records therefore Octroi records cannot be relied upon. In support, he relied upon following judgments; 4. I have carefully considered the submissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e clearly stated that they do not have any method to check whether the truck mentioned on the invoice and truck number actually received at the gate are same. He has also stated that vehicles gets changed because of transhipment. In view of all these statements, RTO report alone cannot be relied upon for denial of the credit. The Octroi report also not conclusive as most of the consignments were procured locally which in any case will not find place in the Octroi records. Other than these material which are not conclusive there is nothing on record to show that the appellant have not received the inputs. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has examined each and every aspect carefully and recorded his findings as under : 7. I have gone throu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 320 2. 39/P-II/CHR-RII/ADC/ADJ /2011-12 dated 05-09-2011 Rs.16,18,618/- 184 3. 46/P-II/C_HR-RII/ADC/ADJ/ 2011-12 dtd.05-09-2011 Rs.30,13,241/- 209 4. 58/PII/CHR-RII/ADC/ADJ /2011-12 dtd.27-10-2011 Rs.11,06,251/- 100 I find that the allegation against the Appellants is based on the sample checking of the input invoices. In 13 cases it was observed that the vehicle numbers ,mentioned in the invoices were not correct and the vehicles bearing those numbers could not be used for transportation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on part of the suppliers of raw material,. enquiries were required to be conducted from these suppliers and they -should have been covered under the SCN vis-`-vis Order-in-Original. I however, I find that no enquiries have been conducted from these suppliers of the inputs and neither they are covered as co-noticee in this case nor any corroborative evidence is placed on record so as to establish that the alleged suppliers had n supplied the goods to the Appellants. The allegation is based on the state of some of the truck owners and Managing Director and two General Managers of the Appellants Company who stated that the input receipt record vis-`-vis the production record is kept only for short period and destroyed after six months. Howeve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pliers located in Mumbai. Major supplies from Mumbai are from M/s Anmol Steel Processors Pvt. Ltd. , C.R. Enterprises and R.D. Jain and Company. I thus find that the Adjudicating Authority has failed to justify the basis for selecting only 13 cases while inferring that the total Cenvat credit availed by the Appellants on 8:13 invoices was without actual receipt of the inputs, more so, when it has not been disputed that the SP machines were manufactured and cleared by the Appellants on payment of duty during the period under consideration. The goods cannot be manufactured without receipt of the raw material required for the same. The Respondents have also not been able to prove that any other alternative raw material was received and used in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
