9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 950X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, for the Appellant. Shri S.K. Mall, SDR, for the Respondent. ORDER Duty of Rs. 18,45,716/- (Rupees eighteen lakhs forty-five thousand seven hundred and sixteen only) stands confirmed against the appellants by denying them the benefit of Modvat credit availed by them during the period 15-3-03 to 11-7-05 on the basis of the invoices issued by the registered dealers. The Revenue's stand is that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ills, in which case they could not have further sold the goods to the appellant M/s. Vipul Copper Pvt. Ltd. and could not have passed the duty burden to them. 4. On the other hand, it is the appellants, contention that they have received the goods from the said dealers, who have been paid by an account payee cheques and the said goods stand entered by them in their RG 23A Part-I register, with cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opper Pvt. Ltd. Admittedly the goods were received by the said appellant from the dealers under the cover of invoices showing duty payment from his RG23D register. The said dealer has also been paid vide account payee cheques. There is no statement of any transporter or any other person indicating that the goods have not been transported from the dealer's premises to the said appellant's premises. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dingly, dispense with the condition of pre-deposit of duty and penalty in respect of M/s. Vipul Copper Pvt. Ltd. 7. As regards the penalties imposed upon the other appellants in terms of the Provisions of Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, the appellants contended that even as per the Revenue's own case the goods were not transported or sold in which case they cannot be confiscated and as per the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
