Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Harish Vaman Shenvi And M/s. Rashtriya Metal Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-I

2015 (11) TMI 663 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Denial of CENVAT Credit - Issue of invoices without actual supply of goods - Held that:- Material which shown to have been cleared under the bill of entry have not been received by the M/s. Nakoda Trading Corporation. Therefore M/s. Nakoda Trading Corporation could not have passed on credit of CVD paid on material which has not been sold to appellant. However, it is observed that no much investigation has been carried out regarding supply of goods from M/s. Nakoda Trading Corporation to the appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ere is contradiction between entire facts as appeared from the records of the appellant and the facts stated by Shri. Ugamraj Jain, therefore cross examination should be allowed. The adjudicating authority as well as first appellate authority irrespective of any conclusion must consider the records of the appellant which was failed to do so. In view of the above discussions, I am of the view that adjudicating authority has violated principle of natural justice inasmuch as not considered request .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise Mumbai Zone I, wherein Order-in-Original No. 06/2011-12/MI/J.C. dated 30/6/2011 was upheld and appeals of the appellant as well as appeal filed by Revenue was rejected. The fact of the case is that the appellant, M/s. Rashtriya Metal Industries Ltd are engaged in the manufacture of copper, bronze and brass strips/foils etc. falling under Chapter 74 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They are also availing Cenvat credit faci .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ad, Delhi (by way of High sea sale/purchase Transactions)on payment of applicable Customs duties and thereafter, such goods were sold/disposed off by them in the local market at Delhi; that the documents were reportedly prepared in such a manner so as to indicate that the goods were transported and delivered from the said ICD to premises of certain registered dealers or to manufacturers of finished goods located in and around Mumbai. In further inquiry relating to the present case it was found t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rporation. The show cause notice culminated into adjudication order wherein demand was confirmed and penalties were imposed. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals). The appellant filed appeal challenging the original order and Revenue also filed appeal challenging portion of the order to the extent of confiscation of the goods was dropped by the adjudicating authority. Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) rejected the appeals of the present appellant as well as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the goods by M/s. Nakoda Trading Corporation to the appellant. He submits that they have submitted all the records before adjudicating authority as well as before the Commissioner(Appeals) regarding transportation of the goods to their factory, receipt of the goods, payment of such supply, usage of the goods in production and the production of resultant goods. It is his submission that irrespective of the location that goods have not been transported from ICD Tughlakabad to M/s. Nakoda Trading C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bogus cannot be disputed. He submits that there is no findings of the lower authorities on the their undisputed documentary evidences regarding purchase, transportation, receipt of the goods, payment made their against use of the material in their production. He submits that lower authorities have relied upon statement of Shri. Ugamraj Jain, who stated that material was not delivered to the appellant. In this context appellant has sought for cross examination of Shri. Ugamraj Jain of M/s. Nakoda .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that material was received by the appellant. He submits that by not allowing cross examination and not considering all the documents by the lower authority there is gross violation of principle of natural justice on the part of the adjudicating authority as well as first appellate authority. He therefore prayed that the matter be remanded to the original adjudicating authority to cross examine Shri. Ugamraj Jain and to consider their documents which shows that material has been received in thei .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rial has not been received by M/s. Nakoda Trading Corporation then it is obvious that the said material could not have been supplied to the appellant. He submits that material itself not been delivered to the M/s. Nakoda Trading Corporation then whether the material was further supplied to appellant or otherwise need not to be established, therefore lower authorities have correctly denied Cenvat credit in respect of goods which has not been delivered to the appellant. This fact is not under disp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

appellant. However, it is observed that no much investigation has been carried out regarding supply of goods from M/s. Nakoda Trading Corporation to the appellant. The appellant has produced all the records to establish that irrespective of any discrepancy at stage of transportation of the goods from ICD Tughlakabad to their supplier but the appellant has received material may not be same material which was cleared from ICD Tughlakabad. Ld Counsels submission that irrespective whether M/s. Nak .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version