TMI Blog2006 (7) TMI 483X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the appellant s factory. Further, I find that the appellant has adduced enough evidence in form of weighbridge slips, Consignment notes of the transporters etc. The revenue has not placed any evidence contrary, in the form of statement of the transporters or weighbridge owner to refute the appellant s claim. This in itself would indicate that the inputs were in fact transported to the appellant. The overwhelming evidences brought on record by the appellant are to suggest that the inputs were received in the factory of the appellant. Hence on merits the appellant s appeal succeeds and demand of duty is unsustainable. The revenue is not disputing the fact that the appellant had filed the RT 12 returns with the authorities, if that be so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were only for availing the Modvat credit and no inputs moved from the supplier. They issued show cause notice on 4-8-2000 to the appellant for recovering the Modvat credit availed by them against the said invoices. The appellant contested the show cause notice on the ground of limitation and on also on merits. The adjudicating authority has confirmed the demand and also imposed penalty under section 11AC and rule 173Q. On an appeal the Commissioner (Appeals), upheld the confirmation of duty and imposition of penalty under rule 173Q but set aside the penalty imposed under section 11AC and interest under section 11AB. Hence appeals by assessee and revenue. 3. The learned advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the whole show cau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the transport of goods but for agriculture work and hence the vehicle could not have transported the inputs. 5. Considered the submissions made by both sides at length and perused the records. The issue involved in this case is denial of Modvat on the ground that the appellant has not received the inputs under the invoices. I find from the records that the lower authorities have confirmed the demand of the duty, based on the fact that the one of the truck, which purportedly transported the inputs, was registered for agriculture work. The authorities have not gone in to fact whether the said truck was capable to transport the inputs or not. To my mind even if the truck is registered for agriculture work, which in itself would not mean th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
