Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2018 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 1580 - HC - Central ExciseCENVAT credit - inputs - Whether “adverse inference” could have been drawn by the Appellate Tribunal against the appellant for denying Cenvat credit of ₹ 5,89,667/in respect of 12 invoices when the appellant has received duty paid inputs under 4,686 invoices during the period in question involving Cenvat credit of ₹ 27,32,17,300/for which no dispute at all been raised by the Revenue; and similar dispute raised by the Revenue for 76 invoices involving Cenvat credit of ₹ 39,76,922/has also been rejected by the Appellate Tribunal? Held that:- The assessee was not able to establish the actual movement of the goods. When the RTO report strongly suggested that the vehicles in which the goods were stated to have been transported were incapable of doing so, the burden would be on the assessee to dislodge these primary findings particularly when the report of the RTO was not challenged. The assessee's stand that it had merely ordered goods on FOR value and therefore was not obliged to explain the manner of transportation is too simplistic in background of facts on record. When RTO report as it remained unexplained by the suppliers of the goods clearly establish that the goods could not have been transported in the vehicle stated to have been done, the assessee called a greater explanation. The conclusions of the Tribunal are not based on drawing presumptions or adverse inference even though the Tribunal has fleetingly so stated. The findings are based on evidence suggesting no movement of goods. Secondly, the quality cannot be claimed in negative - appeal dismissed.
|