9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 85X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orrect – credit is admissible – larger period not invokable for raising demand - E/1136/2007 - A/1192/2008 - Dated:- 9-6-2008 - Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T) Dr. M.K. Rajak, SDR, for the Appellant. Shri S.J. Vyas, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Revenue has filed this appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the order of the original adjudicat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was taken on the basis of invoice; respondents stated that these dies were lying with Metal Forging P. Ltd.; the respondents could not show any proof that it was sent by them to M/s. Metal Forging P. Ltd. and they had not followed any procedure for sending the goods to Metal Forging P. Ltd.; there is no basis for bona fide belief that credit is admissible, since the capital goods were not received ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , New Delhi - 2004 (177) E.L.T. 736 holding that credit cannot be taken without receipt of the goods and the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Mercantile Company v. C.C,E., Calcutta - 2007 (217) E.L.T. 330 (S.C.) in support of his contention that extended period has been rightly invoked. 5. Considering all the rival submissions it is noticed that in this case, admittedly, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld have been strictly as per procedure. I also find that none of the judgments cited by both the sides are comparable on facts and therefore, cannot be relied upon. The problem has arisen because respondents chose the second option described above and it is only a procedural irregularity. It is not disputed that capital goods are used by the job worker for the respondents and they are eligible to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
