9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 904X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellant(s): Sh. Vikrant Kackria Present for the Respondent(s):Sh. Satyapal ORDER Per : Ashok Jindal This is the second round of litigation for the earlier round of litigation. The matters were remanded back to the adjudicating authority vide order dated 22.09.2008. 2. The brief facts of the case are that by way of impugned orders, the Cenvat credit was denied to the appellant and penalties were imposed on the ground that the vehicle number mentioned in the invoices are not transport vehicle and the transporter of the vehicles denied the transportation of goods. The dealers have issued only the invoices are not having godown/registered premises. On the basis of investigation was conducted at the end of M/s Majestic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner (Appeal) who affirm the order of the adjudicating authority, the said order was challenged before this Tribunal and this Tribunal remanded matter back to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication of the case on merits. In remand proceedings, the adjudicating authority partly allowed the Cenvat credit and partly disallowed the Cenvat credit against the said order both sides went in appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeal) who allowed the appeal filed by the Revenue and dismiss the appeal filed by the appellant. Against the said order, appellant is before me. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that on the basis of the same investigation various show cause notices were issued to the assesses to deny Cenvat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r to that. No statement of the drivers have been recorded to ascertain the fact that the goods have been transported to the appellant or not. No investigation was conducted at the end of the SDO, Ranjitsagar dam to ascertain the location of the truck on the said day. Moreover, during the relevant period, the fake number plates were being used by the transporter for transportation of the goods. The said facts have been certified by the police complaint and the newpaper. In that circumstances, the appellants have discharged their burden to prove that they have received the goods in their factory and used in manufacturing of final excisable goods which have been cleared on payment of duty in the absence of any contrary evidence on records, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
