9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 11X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d its onus as required under Rule 9(1) & (5) of CCR, 2004 - Credit cannot be denied - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. E/52698 & 52699/2018-(DB) - Final Order No. 53196-53197/2018 - Dated:- 17-10-2018 - Mr. ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And Mr. BIJAY KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Sh. Priyadarshi Manish, Adv. for the appellant Sh. Rakesh kumar, DR for the respondent ORDER Per: Mr. Anil Choudhary 1. Heard the parties. 2. The issue involved in these two appeals, by the appellant company and its director is whether they have rightly availed Cenvat Credit on inputs. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Appellant is a manufacturer of Copper Strip and wire falling Chapter He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vt. Ltd. received only paper invoices from the dealer companies operated by Shri Amit Gupta, without accompanying with the goods as mentioned in the said invoices. The appellants vide his various letters inter alia dated 19.10.2016, 12.11.2016, 02.12.2016 and thereafter, in the interim reply dated 13.02.2017 to Show Cause Notice requested for cross examination of witness namely Amit Gupta and Sanjeev Maggu as the allegations of non-transport of input to the Appellant s premises were solely made on the basis of the statements of the said persons. However, brushing aside the Appellant s request, the adjudicating proceedings were concluded without allowing cross examination of the witness in violation of principles of natural justice and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ati Alloy Pvt. Ltd. or M/s Moral Alloys Pvt Ltd. (iii) That the inquiry conducted by the DGCEI officers was restricted only to M/ s Malhotra Cables Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Copper Tech Metals Pvt Ltd. and that no question was asked about any other manufacturer. 5.2 Another witness Shri Sanjeev Maggu in his cross examination dated 14.02.2017 retracted his statement before Assistant Commissioner Bahadurgarh by stating that: (i) His statement before DGCEI was not correct. The statement was already typed on the computer in the office of DGCEI, Delhi and he was forced to sign it regarding the transport of goods from Unnati Alloys Pvt Ltd. on bilties of Leo Trans and Logistics. He confirmed that the bilties were genuine and issued by his propri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is prayed that appeal be allowed with consequential relief. 7. Ld. AR for Revenue relies on the findings of the impugned order. Also relies on ruling in: Brillilant Metals Pvt. Ltd. Others VS. C.E. ST Udaipur-Jaipur(Tri). In Appeal No. E/50031/2018 with E/50231/2018, E/51356/2017, E/51357/2017, E/51377/2017, E/51378/2017, E/51638/2017, E/51639/2017, E/51830/2017 8. Considered the rival contentions and perused the appeal records. We find that the issue herein is squarely covered by the precedent order of this Tribunal, in the case of Multimetals Ltd. others vs. CCE ST Udaipur wherein Final Order No. A/51800/51800/2018 dated 11/05/2018. 26. The case of the department is solely based on the statements of Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt has made out a case of irregular availment of cenvat credit mainly based on the statement of Shri Amit Gupta and transporters, but no cross examination of the witnesses was provided to the appellants. One of the witnesses has retracted his earlier statement. Surprisingly, in the instant case, no inquiry was made from the customers of the appellant company. All the transactions related to inputs purchased was duly recorded in the book of accounts and inventory records. The appellant have purchased the goods from the registered dealer. When it so, then it is expected by the department to make a inquiry about the genuineness of the supplier. The appellant had been subjected to regular audit by the department and no such allegation was ever ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
