9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 308X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the sample basis. The order of Commissioner is based on his belief that at the material time what was the practice in the trade. There is no examination whatsoever of the documents like invoices. Not even one invoice has been examined in detail. The impugned order merely repeats the allegations made in the show cause notice that too without giving any independent finding whatsoever. In this background, the impugned order which is based on presumptions cannot be sustained and the same is set aside. The onus of proving that the activity of manufacture had taken place was on the revenue and revenue has failed to fulfill the said obligation despite repeated opportunities being given. There are no merit in the case, the same is set as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idering the case laws as mentioned in the appeal of the Revenue. 4. By the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) disposed of the appeal with certain direction. The main contention of the learned Advocate is that the value of the trading goods also clubbed with the value or computer system. He submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) had not seen the documents and the invoices. 5. On perusal of the impugned order, we find that the learned Advocate appeared before the Commissioner (Appeals) and requested that whatever they have submitted before the earlier Appellate authority and the documents submitted earlier holds good for the purpose of passing of the order in the present proceedings. It is also submitted that the invoices ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 44 (of 1995-96) and Sr. Nos. 1, 2 3 of 1996-97) in the case of M/s. Prompt System Software, the Order-In-Appeal Nos 336 337 to 339/2002/Commr(A)/Raj both dated 30.09.2002 have never been challenged and hence, no interference is warranted to that extent. Further, on careful perusal of the case records, I observe that the appellants, at no point of time, have disputed this fact that they had not sold the computer system under the impugned invoices. The only contention raised by the appellants is that they had purchased the computer system from the upstream supplier and re-sold the same. I do not find ample force in this argument as a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the order of Commissioner is based on his belief that at the material time what was the practice in the trade. There is no examination whatsoever of the documents like invoices. Not even one invoice has been examined in detail. The impugned order merely repeats the allegations made in the show cause notice that too without giving any independent finding whatsoever. In this background, the impugned order which is based on presumptions cannot be sustained and the same is set aside. The onus of proving that the activity of manufacture had taken place was on the revenue and revenue has failed to fulfill the said obligation despite repeated opportunities being given. 3. In this background, we do not find any merit in the case, the same is s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
