9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 655X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2-2018 - Mr. M.V. RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND Mr. C.J. MATHEW, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) None for the Appellant. Shri R. Srinivas, (AR) for the Respondent. [Order per: M.V. Ravindran] This appeal is directed against Order-in-Original No. 46/2010 (MP) dated 31.12.2010. 2. None appeared on behalf of the appellant despite notice. Since the matter is of 2011 we take up the same for disposal even in the absence of any representation. 3. We considered the submissions made by Learned Departmental Representative and the grounds of appeal as in the appeal memorandum. 4. On perusal of records, it transpires that the issue is regarding availment of CENVAT credit during the period March, 2005 to March, 2006 on Pig Mould ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of supplier. In such a case, the discussion on the issue of transportation of the subject goods and receipt of the goods in the factory premises of the assesses is a futile exercise, in the instant case, from the above material facts, any common prudent man, with common knowledge, can easily conclude that the subject goods were not manufactured, not cleared, not transported and not received in the factory of production of the assesses and the entire exercise is made just for fraudulent availment of CENVAT credit on faked invoices against which no goods were supplied. 31. The assessees pleading that no proceedings can be issued against the noticee for taking credit on Pig Mould/ C.I. Castings without receipt of the same based on Order- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der subject fake invoices issued by them to the assesses based on which the assesses availed CENVAT credit, was established beyond doubt therein and this vital fact having greater relevancy to the present issue, could safely be taken into consideration while deciding the present case. The assessee s other contention that other than the non entry of the incoming lorry numbers, the Department has no evidence in support of non receipt of the Pig Moulds/ C.I. Castings is therefore not correct. 32. A number of questions were posed in the reply to the notice by the assesses expecting answers from the department. But they have failed to note that the burden to prove the admissibility of the goods for taking CENVAT credit, is on the person, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fying that it was not mandatory to enter all incoming vehicles in HOLOOL SOFTWARE used experimentally came to the rescue of the assesses as there was no piece of evidence that they are for the goods under subject invoices rebutting the material facts brought on record by the department. It is strange to believe that there is a possibility to escape all the vehicles more than 60 in number passed the check post at different intervals on different days without getting entered even at least one vehicle. By not furnishing the reply to the show cause notice for a period of over one year the assesses appears to have made all possible efforts with post thoughts to side track the issue. The assesses have not produced any valid evidence to prove th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
