Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (2) TMI 63 - AT - Central ExciseWaiver of pre-deposit of CENVAT Credit and equal amount of penalty imposed seeked - non providing adequate opportunity in defending the case by way of supplying the documents and allowing cross examination of the witnesses as submitted by assessee - Held that:- Analyzing the said contention of the appellant, we find that even though the show cause notice was issued on 17/12/2012, specifically mentioning therein to file their reply within thirty days, but the appellant chose not to respond to the said notice; also in spite of sufficient opportunities of hearings were allowed to them in December, 2012 and January/February, 2013 they failed to respond. Therefore, it is inappropriate to say that the Ld. Commissioner has not allowed sufficient opportunity to the appellant to defend their case. Simultaneously, it can not be brushed aside also that the present demand raised serious allegation ie. non-receipt of inputs, and availment of credit only on the invoices during the period May, 2008 to December, 2009 when the finished goods were claimed to have been manufactured and cleared on payment of duty. While confirming the demand, the Ld. Commissioner referred to the statement of the proprietor, the employees, the transporters, input suppliers and the certificate issued by the Chartered Engineer etc. in arriving at the conclusion that the appellant at the relevant point of time did not have infrastructure to manufacture the quantity of excisable goods claimed to have been manufactured and cleared from their factory. All these evidences need to be examined in detail after taking into consideration the reply of the appellant against such evidences. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we are of the opinion that the Appellant be provided a chance to rebut the allegation levelled against them.
|