9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cture their final products - The said allegation has been made on the basis of assumptions and presumptions. During the course of investigation, both suppliers as well as manufacturer-buyer have stated in their statements that they have supplied the goods, in question to the appellant, who received the goods. There is no evidence placed on record by the Revenue that the goods in question have not been received by the appellant-manufacturer. Merely adding the word rejected scrap in the invoice cannot be the reason to say that the goods were not received by the appellant and there is no such evidence placed on record by the Revenue. The said goods used by the appellant in the manufacture of final products. The Revenue has to prove if the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts and availed cenvat credit on duty paid of various raw materials received either from the manufacturer or from the dealer. Description of the said raw material is defective CR sheets dies, etc. or otherwise. Investigation was conducted wherein the documents were verified, the statements of various persons recorded. All the statements are exculpatory. The Revenue entertained a view that as per description of goods in the invoices, the goods cannot be used in the furnace installed by the appellant for further manufacturing of ingots. It was also found that in certain invoices, the appellant has altered the description of the goods, therefore, the appellant has diverted the goods and the goods were not received by the appellant for manufactu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were made to the suppliers through banking channels. There is no rebuttal of these averments made by the supplier and proprietor or the appellant. It is his submission that the credit can not be denied on the rejected/defective which were used melting scrap, therefore, it is settled law that the goods are either rejected or defective, even if they are final product, the credit cannot be denied on the same as the same become input for manufacturing of the final goods by the appellant. Mere fact that in some invoices, the word scrap was added in the invoices did not alter the basic nature of such rejected/defective, the appellant did not given any reason for such addition of word in the invoices. There is no evidence on record to show that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tatements that they have supplied the goods, in question to the appellant, who received the goods. There is no evidence placed on record by the Revenue that the goods in question have not been received by the appellant-manufacturer Moreover, the appellant has changed the description of goods in the invoice and one of the sample invoice is reproduced for consideration as under: 8. Merely adding the word rejected scrap in the invoice cannot be the reason to say that the goods were not received by the appellant and there is no such evidence placed on record by the Revenue. The said goods used by the appellant in the manufacture of final products. The Revenue has to prove if the said goods have been diverted or not used by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvoices and received the payment through account payee cheque. The Revenue entertained a view that as the goods in question apart from waste and scrap are prime quality product cannot be the inputs for the appellant M/s.Tharaj for manufacture of their final products, therefore, the show cause notice dt.20.4.2012 was issued to the appellants for the period 1.4.2007 to 31.8.2011 to deny Cenvat credit on the goods in question and to impose penalty on M/s. Tharaj as well as all the suppliers who are co-appellants before us. The matter was adjudicated, the demand of duty by denying credit was confirmed along with interest and penalty on M/s.Tharaj equal to the duty was confirmed and penalties have also been imposed on the coappellants. Against t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In that circumstance, the appellant M/s.Tharaj has been able to prove the usage of the said goods for manufacture of their final products. In that circumstance, the allegation that it is only paper transaction is not sustainable. Moreover, the Revenue cannot decide what should be the inputs for the appellant to manufacture their final products in the absence of any corroborative evidence. 9. As the Revenue has failed to bring on record any cogent evidence in support of their allegation, therefore, the allegation that the goods in question cannot be the inputs for the appellant M/s.Tharaj for manufacture of their final product is not sustainable. 10. In that circumstance, we hold that the appellant M/s.Tharaj has rightly av ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
