TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2067X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hey had taken one consignment from VWPPL they have been put into the whole ordeal. The learned counsel for appellants submitted that the appellants have a good reputation and maintain records and pay duty. There has been no instance of allegations. That even though the amount involved may be small, it affects their reputation. These submissions do have substance. Further, the SCN is issued alleging evasion of duty and clandestine removal of goods. Whereas the order passed confirms the demand under wrongful availment of Cenvat Credit. Such an order at the outset in unsustainable. The first appellate authority ought to have considered these aspects without putting the appellant to further hardships of litigation. I find that the appellants ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at appellant had properly accounted the transaction. According to the officers, the materials gathered from VWPPL showed that a further consignment dated 24.12.2008 for 3686 Kg. of the value of ₹ 3,65,909/- was also supplied to appellants by VWPPL. This entry received from the search conducted in VWPPL did not tally with the accounts of the appellant. It is the appellant s case that then they were asked by the officers to pay the duty of the said second consignment (Rs. 47,680/-) and appellants were assured that they could apply for a refund later. To their surprise, they were issued a Show Cause Notice dated 27.4.2012 alleging clandestine activities in connivance with VWPPL. The proceedings finalized in the order which confirmed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, and was removing finished products clandestinely. In pursuance to the materials discovered from premises of VWPPL the premises of the appellant was also searched. On inspection of records of the appellant, the officers could not tally the entry found in VWPPL with the accounts of the appellant. This has led to the initiation of proceedings against the appellant. Apart from the material received from VWPPL, that a second consignment was also supplied to appellants, there is nothing to connect the appellant with the alleged clandestine activities. The officers do not have a case that there was any irregularity in the accounts maintained by the appellants. According to appellants they paid the duty only because the officers assured them tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
