9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 1025X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10,29,734/- was set aside. 2. The fact of the case is that the manufacturer/importers had purchased imported aluminium scrap on high-sea-sale basis from M/s. Aman Impex, Mumbai and cleared the same from Customs through M/s. Nikhil Shipping Agency, Mumbai; that the said scrap so imported, after clearance from the Customs, was diverted to some other place and not delivered at the factory of the appellant M/s. Specific Alloys Pvt. Ltd. However, the appellant, M/s. Specific Alloys Pvt. Ltd. had availed CENVAT credit merely on the strength of the duty-paying documents i.e. Bill of Entry without using the scrap as inputs in the manufacture of final products and had thereby contravened the provisions of the Act. The said diversion of the inputs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Section 11AC of the Act read with Rule 15(2) of the Rules; (d) Imposed fine of Rs. 5,14,867/- under Section 34 of the Act in lieu of confiscation of inputs valued at Rs. 51,48,670/-; (e) Imposed fine of Rs. 5,14,867/- under Section 34 of the Act in lieu of confiscation of manufactured finished goods valued at Rs. 51,48,670/-. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. PIII/RS/384-386/2011 dated 29/12/2011 dismissed the appeal on the ground of non-compliance of pre-deposit order No. PIII/RS/06-08/2011 dated 24/11/2011. Aggrieved by the said order-in-appeal the appellants filed appeal before this Tribunal and this Tribunal vide order No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bsence of such vital statements the appellant was not in a position to make their representation before the adjudicating authority. He submits that by not supplying the relied upon documents the adjudication order is grossly under violation of principles of natural justice. He also submits that the denial of CENVAT credit is also made for the period beyond five years and the same is not sustainable irrespective any facts involved in the case. He requested that the matter be remanded to the original adjudicating authority with a direction for supply of relied upon documents and thereafter adjudication be done. 5. Shri Ashuthosh Nath, Asstt. Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
