9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, Copper billets, Copper flats/bar, Copper strips, Copper Rods, Copper Wires and other articles of copper classifiable under Chapter 74 of the schedule of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They were availing CENVAT credit benefit under CENVAT Credit Rules. On 27.03.2008, the Central Excise officers of Preventive Section, Vapi Commissionerate visited the appellant s factory and searched the premises. The said officers seized several records including input invoices for the period March 2004 to March 2008. It has also recorded the statement of various persons including Shri Vishnu Agarwal, partner and Shri Kalpesh Rathod, Manager-cum-Authorised Signatory and the transporters. 3. A Show Cause Notice dated 30.03.2009 was issued by the Joint Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oices were duty paid. It is also submitted that the appellant No. 2 and 3, in their statements stated that they have received the raw materials. The observation of the appellants were only when the RTO report was shown that three-wheeler or tempo can not carry such materials. It is contended that the input supplier confirmed the delivery of the goods and the payment were made by cheque. The genuinenity of the invoices is of no doubt. In this context, credit can not be denied merely on the basis of the report of the RTO. She also drew attention of the Bench to the payment vouchers in the memorandum of appeal. She has filed written submission which is kept on record. 5. Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue reiterated the finding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant paid the amount by account payee cheques to the input suppliers which is recorded in the statutory records. The dispute relates to as per RTO report the vehicle numbers mentioned in the said 18 input Invoices, were not capable of transporting the goods. Learned Advocate for the appellant submits that the receipt of inputs at their factory and used in the manufacture of final product as evident from CENVAT records, which was not objected by the Department. 7. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner vs. Motabhai Iron and Steel Industries 2015 (316) ELT 374 (Guj.), has observed that merely on the basis of such an RTO report credit can not be denied holding that inputs were not received alongwith invoices. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
