9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ord except the statement of Shri Amit Gupta and the transporters and the allegations of receiving back of cash as against the payments made through banking channels - It is also a fact that the appellant was reflecting the receipt of the inputs in their statutory records. Further, the Revenue has not alleged that the inputs required for making the final product were procured by the appellant from any other source. In the absence of the inputs, it is not possible to manufacture final product, which the appellant have shown to have manufactured and cleared on payment of duty. There are no justifiable reasons to deny the Cenvat credit or to impose penalties upon the appellants - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s for the said inputs was being made by M/s Arya Alloys through banking channels but subsequently M/s Arya Alloys was receiving back the said amounts in cash. Statements of Shri Amit Gupta as also some of the transporters were recorded by the Revenue indicating that no inputs were being transported by M/s Unnati Alloys to M/s Arya Alloys. 3. Based upon the above, proceedings were initiated against the appellant resulting in passing of the present impugned orders. The appellant, on the other hand, contended that all the inputs received by them were duly recorded in their statutory records and were shown to have been consumed in the manufacture of their final product, which was cleared on payment of duty. It was their contention that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions stands followed by the Tribunal in number of other judgments. Reference can be made to following decisions: (i) M/s Moranl Alloys Pvt. Ltd., M/s Unnati Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Final Order No. 52055-52056/2018-SM dated 29.5.2018; (ii) Synergy Steel Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CGST CCE, Alwar Final Order No. 50673/2019 dated 15.3.2019; (iii) Gian Castings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Chandigarh 2015 (319) ELT 339 (Tri.-Del.). 5. On going through the impugned orders, I find that the same set of investigations and the same evidences stand referred to in the present case also which were available in the earlier orders of the Tribunal. On being questioned, learned Authroised Representative has not been able to bring out any other evidence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
