9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1008X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be re-adjudicated by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who should give proper findings on averments and documentation furnished by the appellant in their defence. Utilization of excess Cenvat credit of basic custom duty - Held that: - The appellant had not shown the Cenvat credit of BCD, CVD and Cenvat duty separately in their register. On this issue too, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has given no finding at all in his order and simply upheld the order of the adjudicating authority - matter requires reconsideration. Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Appeal No. ST/60698/2017-ST[SM] - A/61310/2018 - Dated:- 14-3-2018 - Mr. Devender Singh, Member ( Technical ) For the Appellant : Shri Navdeep Monga, Advocate For the Respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued for recovery of credit of ₹ 12,59,200/- along with interest and proposing penalty under section 77 and section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The matter was adjudicated, wherein the entire demand was confirmed along with interest and penalty of ₹ 12,59,200/- was imposed on them. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the adjudicating authority. Aggrieved from the same, the appellant have filed this appeal. 3. Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that they had removed the capital goods, which were imported vide bill of entry No. 873803, as scrap. These were hydraulic press machines each having weight of 25 tonnes. He submits that weight of the machine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssioner (Appeals) to contend that Commissioner (Appeals) has simply confirmed the findings of lower authority without dealing with their contentions and case laws. 4.1 Ld. A.R. submits that on the day of visit on 28.08.2012, none of the machines were tallying with the machines in the bills of entry. He also points out that the appellant themselves had stated that they did not have adequate fund to repair the machines. Hence, it was clear that the machines were not scrap. He further points out that in 2012 seven years had not elapsed, still the appellant did not produce any purchase documents of 2006. Ld. AR also submits that difference in the weight was because of certain accessories and electrical items, which were sold along with the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allegedly were not sold as scrap and (ii) utilization of excess Cenvat credit of basic custom duty. 8. On the issue no. (i): During the hearing, the appellant have submitted before this Tribunal the documents pertaining to the purchase of three hydraulic presses, bills of entry for the same, the freight invoice, document pertaining to purchase of plates for hydraulic presses and other accessories parts, bills of entry and the invoices, for the same three invoices of the machine scrap and bills addressed to M/s Sewa Leathers along with duly filled out forms VAT-D3, consignment notes of TCI Freight and dharmkanta receipts for all the three packages sent to M/s Sewa Leathers. They have also enclosed the quotations of machines and parts i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
