Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2015 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 157 - AT - Central ExcisePenalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - CENVAT Credit - Held that:- No statement of the appellant has been recorded neither any summons to record the statement have been issued to the appellant. The statement of manufacturing supplier shows that they were issuing invoices to M/s. Rupesh Bansal. The contention of the appellant before me is that they have received the goods under the cover of invoices issued by M/s. Khemka Ispat Limited. This statement of the appellant made before me was never tried to test the level of investigation him nor any other corroborative evidence have been produced in investigation that the appellant has received invoices, not the goods. On the contrary, the statement of the second stage dealer to whom the appellant has issued invoices in his statement categorically admitted that they have received the goods from the appellant against the duty paid which were sold to the manufacturing buyer who already admitted that he has received the goods. Therefore/ the statement of the second stage dealer and manufacturing buyer supposed the case of the appellant and in the absence of any statement of the appellant now the question arises why the statement of the appellant was not recorded during the course of investigation. Therefore, I conclude that investigation against the appellant is incomplete. - penalty on the appellant is not imposable without any corroborative evidence against the appellant.
|