Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (1) TMI 483 - CESTAT MUMBAICENVAT credit - fake invoices - receipt of invoices without receipt of goods - whether the penalties imposed on both the appellants is correct or otherwise and whether the goods were held liable for confiscation will stand scrutiny of law or otherwise? Held that: - In the case of materials on which CENVAT credit was raised without the receipt of the material there cannot be any confiscation of the goods as the goods never travelled from the supplier's premises to the appellant. Hence there cannot any goods which to be held liable for confiscation - As regards the finished goods manufactured and cleared by the appellant duty has been discharged by the appellant and the goods are cleared from main-appellant's premises on duty paying documents hence when the goods are not available for confiscation, the question of confiscation does not arise - It is settled law that when the goods are not available for confiscation, question of imposing redemption fine in lieu of confiscation does not arise. As regards demands raised, since the appellant has not contested the said demands before the lower authorities and also before this bench, the demand of an amount of ₹ 1,90,983/- stands upheld and having paid the same, the appropriation ordered by the lower authorities is also correct - the equivalent amount of penalty imposed on the main-appellant is correct and does not require any interference. Equivalent amount of penalty imposed on the individual Shri Ashok Katyal - Held that: - it is very clear that the goods never moved from M/s Synoprene Polymers Pvt. Ltd. to the main appellant and the confiscation ordered by the lower authority having been set aside by me, the penalty imposed on the individual Shri Ashok Katyal is unwarranted and needs to be set aside. Appeal allowed in part.
|