Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 783 - AT - Central ExciseDenial of CENVAT credit - interest - penalty - the main allegation against the appellant is that the appellant failed to submit any documentary evidence to substantiate their claim that the goods have been received from the manufacturer or dealers and used in or in relation to the manufacture of finished goods - Held that: - Rule 9(4) is applicable in respect of maintenance of the records by the dealers. It is a case that the appellant availed the credit on the basis of the documents through a middleman and the inputs were directly received by the appellant from the dealer who was registered with the Central Excise authorities - the Tribunal on an identical issue in the case of Jupiter Alloy & Steel (India) Ltd. v. CCE, Kolkata-IV, [2016 (12) TMI 1217 - CESTAT KOLKATA], where it was held that such persons who are taking part in transit sale need not get themselves registered as per provisions of Rule 57G of the CER, 1994 - appeal allowed - demand set aside - decided in favor of appellant.
|