Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 121 - CESTAT CHANDIGARHCENVAT credit denied - activity undertook by the appellant does not amounts to manufacture - Held that:- Admittedly, these aluminium sheets have been cleared by the appellant on payment of duty. Therefore, the duty paid shall amount of reversal of Cenvat Credit. Therefore, Cenvat Credit cannot be denied to ₹ 49,05,525/- - credit allowed. CENVAT credit - denial on the ground that there was abnormal delay in delivery and vehicles not authorized to go outside Chattisgarh and also vehicle number not mentioned in the invoices - Held that:- It has not been investigated by the revenue, the mode of transportation explained by the transporter as well as the supplier. In that circumstances, Cenvat Credit cannot be denied to the appellants - credit allowed. CENVAT credit - denial on the ground that vehicle owner denied having transported the goods - Held that:- The cross-examination of Shri Dinesh Kumar is not allowed. Moreover, he was not driving the vehicle and he has given the statement on the basis of his memory since he was not maintaining any records. In that circumstances, merely on the basis of presumption and assumption, the Cenvat Credit cannot be denied. CENAVT credit - denial on the ground that vehicle owner denied having transported the items and vehicles were actually at some other destination - Held that:- Merely on the basis of the statements of the Manager and the Managing Director, who are not well conversant with the day-to-day working of the transport company, Cenvat Credit cannot be denied to the appellant in the absence of any cross-examination thereof. CENVAT credit - denial on the ground that the vehicle is actually a scooter - Held that:- The vehicle number, which involved in transportation of goods is HR- 29-J-7449, whereas the revenue has investigated the vehicle No.HR-29-J-7949, which never transported the goods. Therefore, the case of the Revenue is only on the basis of assumption and presumption - credit cannot be denied. Penalty not imposable. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|