9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 40X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ill not lead to inevitable conclusion that no raw material was ever received by the assessee. The Revenue has not produced any evidence that if the raw material was not received by the present appellant, where was the same diverted - The Revenue has neither alleged nor produced any evidence to show any alternate source of procurement of said raw material. CENVAT credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Ex. Appeal No. 56953 of 2013-SM - Final Order No. 52103/2018 - Dated:- 1-6-2018 - Hon ble Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member ( Judicial ) Sh. Rajat Pandey, Advocate for the appellant Sh. S. Nunthuk Sh. P. Juneja, ARs for the respondent ORDER Per : Archana Wadhwa As per facts on record, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Sh. Dhanesh Kumar Jain on 31.03.2010 but subsequently another statement was recorded on 20.08.2010 wherein he admitted that his first statement dated 29.03.2010 was the correct retraction of facts. 3. During the course of further investigation statements of the Partners of M/s Jagdamba Steels as also M/s Daga Trading Co. (P) Ltd. were recorded. The scrutiny of the statement also revealed that they have never purchased the round of standard specification from M/s Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited (RINL), which was the manufacturer of the said goods. 4. Based on the above, proceedings were initiated by way of issuance of show cause notice dated 30.08.2010 proposing denial of the credit to the extent of around ₹ 12 lakhs alongwith co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... RINL; that M/s Daga Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. has though, purchased Rounds of standard specification of 55 Si7 20.64mm from M/s RINL but the same have never been sold to appellant t No. 1. The scrutiny of case records by the investigation in the matter has also proved that though both M/s Jagdamba Steel and M/s Daga Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. have shown sale of Rounds of other specification to appellant No.1, but the same cannot be used for manufacturing of ERC as they are of different size and composition. Further it is also on record that the vehicle numbers mentioned on the sale invoices of both M/s Jagdamba Steel and M/s Daga Tradin g Co. Pvt. Ltd. were misquoted and misused which means that in the instant case no physical sale of any material ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l lead to one factor that the appellant did not use the standard specifications material, as specified in the contract. The said fact will not lead to inevitable conclusion that no raw material was ever received by the assessee. The Revenue has not produced any evidence that if the raw material was not received by the present appellant, where was the same diverted. Going further, the appellant have admittedly manufactured their final product which stands cleared on payment of duty. Such final product can be manufactured only out of the raw material. If the appellant have not received the raw material, I really fail to understand that how the final product can be manufactured. The Revenue has neither alleged nor produced any evidence to show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
