9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Cenvat Credit availed on Central Excise Invoice issued by the suppliers of inputs for the period prior to 3rd August, 2004 (date of the flood) could be denied and equal penalty could be imposed on the appellant, without appreciating the fact that the said valid invoices were destroyed/ washed away in flood and subsequently, the appellant had obtained photocopies of the same with great difficulty from the suppliers of inputs and retained the said photocopies and shown to the officers of the Central Excise at the time of audit of the Unit and also produced Certificates from Range Superintendents of input supplier?" 3. The Appellant is engaged i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the issue to the adjudicating authority, by recording as under: " 5. We find force in the above submission of the learned advocate. As more documents, on the basis of which the Commissioner has earlier granted relief, stand produced by the appellant before us now, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Commissioner for verification. He shall also reconsider the appellant's submission that the documents were washed away in flood and were not available for reconstruction of the file. At this stage, the learned advocate also explained that there are around 6 invoices issued after the flood incidence, in respect of which the MODVAT Credit also stand denied. We leave the said issue for Commissioner to decide afresh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rieved, the Appellant filed an appeal to the Tribunal. The impugned order of the Tribunal, after reproducing its observations in paragraph 5 of its order dated 3rd May, 2010, further records the fact that during the denovo adjudication, the Appellant had not produced any new documents except those submitted at the time of the earlier adjudication. In the light of the above, impugned order of the Tribunal upheld the order of the adjudicating authority passed in denovo adjudication. It deleted the penalty imposed upon the proprietor over and above that on the proprietorship appellant firm. 9. In appeal before us, Mr. Dharmadhikari, learned Counsel, in support of the Appeal submits that there is no denial of the fact that the inputs were rece ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
