Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 197 - AT - Central ExciseCENVAT Credit - inputs - CR sheets dies, etc - alleged wrongful description of raw material - Revenue entertained a view that as per description of goods in the invoices, the goods cannot be used in the furnace installed by the appellant for further manufacturing of ingots - penalty - HELD THAT:- The credit sought to be denied to the appellant on the ground that CR coils of small length cannot be the inputs for the appellant to be used in their final products. The only allegation on the basis that the said HR/CR coils can be used by cycle manufacture to manufacture their final products - The said allegation has been made on the basis of assumptions and presumptions. During the course of investigation, both suppliers as well as manufacturer-buyer have stated in their statements that they have supplied the goods, in question to the appellant, who received the goods. There is no evidence placed on record by the Revenue that the goods in question have not been received by the appellant-manufacturer. Merely adding the word ‘rejected scrap’ in the invoice cannot be the reason to say that the goods were not received by the appellant and there is no such evidence placed on record by the Revenue. The said goods used by the appellant in the manufacture of final products. The Revenue has to prove if the said goods have been diverted or not used by the appellant in the manufacture of their final products then from where the inputs have been procured by the appellant to manufacture final products. There is no statement of transporter to that extent has been brought on record. The Revenue has failed to produce any evidence to show that the inputs in question have not been used by the appellant in the manufacture of their final products. Therefore, the demand is on the basis assumptions and presumptions, hence, cannot be confirmed by denying the credit to the appellants - the benefit of doubt goes in favor of the appellants - Credit allowed - penalty also not imposable. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|