9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 960X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atement of Shri Amit Gupta, Director of BCCPL. No other investigation as mentioned in the above decision got conducted. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us companies for the import of metals in the said company and selling the same in the market in cash and also about supplying the cenvatable invoices of all the said companies to the manufacturers to enable them to avail the cenvat credit without physically delivering the goods under the said invoices. It was also stated that the Bilties(GRs) of M/s. Leo Trans and Logistics, New Delhi and their vehicle numbers have been used to show fictitious transportation of consignment to the manufacturer against cenvatable invoices. M/s. BCCPL is found to be one of the such manufacturer who is alleged to have availed the cenvat credit amounting to R.s 1,25,87,331/- without actually receiving the goods during the period from 01.04.2011 to 18.12.2011. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reads as follows: "26. The case of the department is solely based on the statements of Shri Amit Gupta and other transporters, for which no cross examination was provided. Another witness Shri Sanjeev Magoo n his cross Examination has retracted his earlier submissions. The case of the department against the appellant is that only invoices were provided without supplying the gods. In the instant case, it appears that the appellant has availed the cenvat credit on the basis of such duty paying documents and cleared the goods manufactured on payment of duty, which was accepted by the department without any objection. As per the chart mentioned in the impugned order, the departmental officers expressed doubt about the genuineness of sales of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been subjected to regular audit by the department and no such allegation was ever made. Shri Nitin Agarwal, Executive of the company on 04.02.2016 and 14.02.2016 had repeatedly mentioned that they have received the goods in the factory and were duly accounted in the books of accounts and entered in stock account. The appellants have not made any payment to the transporter towards freight for these consignments. Therefore, the appellant was not concerned about the vehicle number mentioned in invoices as the goods will have to reach the appellants premises on the basis of FOR." 7. In the present case also the Department has simply relied upon the information as received from DRI. The only investigation is the statement of Shri Amit Gupta, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
