Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 1167 - CESTAT CHANDIGARHClandestine removal - issuance of invoices only - Held that: - I find that the Department has adduced sufficient evidence that the first stage dealer M/s Rohit Ispat had no godown, that he had taken the registration on the basis of bogus rent deed and on the trading of pig iron shown as admitted by the proprietor of the M/s Rohit Ispat were only paper transactions without any accompanying goods - Evidently, there was fraud committed right from the day the dealer M/s Rohit Ispat applied for his registration and false transactions were made repeatedly & systematically to defraud Revenue. The appellant indulged in issuing invoices on the basis of paperless transactions that they had with M/s Rohit Ispat, they were very much part of the fraud. The appellant further contended that the Department has alleged violation of provision of Cenvat Credit Rules but the penalty on the co-noticee is under Central Excise Rules. I find that this objection of the appellant has no the legal basis as under Rule 26(2) of Central Excise Rules, penalty is imposable on any person who meets the requirement of that Section, which the appellant meet as they issued invoices without delivery of goods. Request for cross-examination denied - Held that: - I find that when the appellant failed to participate in the original proceedings, despite several opportunities were granted to them, it reflects that the appellant are following dilatory tactics to deprive the Revenue from recovery of its legitimate dues. Hence, the request is rejected. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
|