Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2012 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (10) TMI 933 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - whether CENVAT credit on structural items such as MS plates, angles, channels etc. as capital goods was admissible to the respondent for the period from March to May, 2009 and the month of January 2010 - Commissioner assessee's appeal on the basis of photographs showed by them - Held that:- Though, in their written submissions before the original authority, the party took a contrary stand claiming that the structural items had been used for manufacturing chimney, receiver and condenser, no evidence in support of the claim was adduced. Today the learned counsel has also fairly conceded that no photographs were shown to the original authority. It was before the appellate authority for the first time that the respondent produced photographs in support of the above plea. There is nothing in the impugned order to indicate that the appellate authority inspected the respondent’s factory to check the veracity of the claim before it. There is nothing to indicate that the photographs were cross-checked with any other material, nor was the photographer examined to ascertain the veracity of the party’s claim. It is unfortunate that a few photographs produced by the party for the first time before the Commissioner(Appeals) were taken in face value and a decision rendered in favour of the party. When the Commissioner(Appeals) observed that it was within the power of the original authority to verify the usage of the items, he was probably oblivious of the fact that the usage claimed by them in the reply submitted by the party was accepted by the original authority and the fact that no photographs were produced by the party before the original authority to support their alternative stand - Decided in favour of assessee.
|