9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 409X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oods in question have been used within the factory premises of the appellants. The Adjudicating authority has not given proper consideration to such documentary evidence provided by the appellant. When the appellant produced the Certificate from a qualified professional, the Adjudicating Authority is bound to consider and pass a proper order. If the certificate issued is not found to be acceptable, the same is required to be rebutted by the Adjudicating Authority which has not been done in this case. The High Court of Kerala in the case of CADBURY INDIA LIMITED VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, [ 2014 (12) TMI 403 - KERALA HIGH COURT] has held While a certificate issued by a Chartered Accountant or a Cost Accountant w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lied to Indian Railways. Show Cause Notice was issued on the ground that these items are not inputs for manufacture of the finished goods. Accordingly, Cenvat credit of Rs.53,77,185/- taken on such items during the period 2005 to May 2006 was sought to be recovered vide Show Cause Notice dated 07.05.2009. After due process, the Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand vide Order-in-Original dated 20.01.2011. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before the Tribunal. 2. The Ld.Advocate, appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that the goods in question were proper inputs used by them in the manufacture of Fish Plates and Metal Liners supplied to Indian Railways. He submits that before the Adjudicating Authority they have produced all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the period January 2005 to May 2006 has been issued on 07.05.2009, that is after more than three years after the Cenvat was taken by them. The Appellant has been regularly filing their ER-1 Return showing the details of Cenvat Credit taken by them. There is no dispute or allegation that the appellant has failed to file any ER-1 Returns during the period under question. Therefore, all the facts have been disclosed properly in the ER-1 Returns and proper records have been maintained for the movement of goods. There is no dispute about the receipt and accountal of the goods in their factory. Hence, the question of suppression with intent to evade Excise Duty will not arise. Accordingly, he submits that the confirmed demand is required to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chartered Accountant or a Cost Accountant would normally suffice to discharge that burden, if the revenue authorities have any doubt with regard to the genuineness of the certificate or the correctness of it, it is for them to insist on further documents from the claimant to support the certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant or the Cost Accountant. ... (Emphasis supplied] 7. We find that the Department has not rebutted the documentary evidences brought in by the appellant. Accordingly, we allow the appeal on merits. 8. We are also in agreement with the appellant that all the details of Cenvat credit taken by them have been properly disclosed in the ER-1 Returns. There is no allegation that the goods in question w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
