9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 1207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 44-45, 2852 to 2856, 2873 to 2877, 2879 to 2881, 2908-09, 2970, 2980 to 2982, 3005, 3092 to 3095 OF 2006-SM - - X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o submit that the appellants failed to establish that they supplied the material with invoices with any evidence. Learned DRs relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Rajeev Alloys Ltd. vs. CCE, reported in 2008 (89) RLT 227 (CESTAT-Del.). 4. After hearing both sides and on perusal of the records, I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) on identical issue in earlier orders set aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the case of M/s. Rajeev Alloys Ltd. vs. CCE vide Final Order dated 3.9.2008 in Appeal No. 2434/2006 [reported in 2008 (89) RLT 227 (CESTAT-Del.)]. The contention of the Revenue is that once it has been established that the vehicle numbers mentioned in the invoices are not of trucks or the transporter has denied the transportation of goods or the dealer has no godown than the burden is on the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ving established that the vehicle in question, were incapable of transporting large quantity mentioned in the invoices, the onus shifts to the assessee to prove that goods were duly received by them and used in the manufacture of excisable goods. In view of the above decision, we find that as the initial burden that goods had not been received by the appellant has been discharged by the Revenue, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
