Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
CGST - Acts + GST Rates GST Ntf. GST Forms GST - Manual GST - FAQ State GST Acts SGST Ntf. I. Tax Manual
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Manoranjan Singh Duggal Versus Commr. of C. Ex., Delhi-IV, Faridabad

2015 (325) E.L.T. 892 (Tri. - Del.) - Cenvat credit denial and imposition of penalty - M/s. Aar Aar Technoplast Pvt. Ltd. has availed cenvat credit on the basis of invoices without receiving the goods in the factory - First stage dealer M/s. Jagruti Resins Pvt. Ltd. has not supplied the goods to the second stage dealer M/s. Shree Sai International, Faridabad, from whom goods have been purchased by the appellant - Held that:- The appellants have maintained proper records to prove that the goods h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d payment has been routed through approved banking channel. Denial of cenvat credit on the ground of investigation conducted at the premises of the first stage dealers, cannot be the defensible ground, especially in view of the fact that no investigation has been conducted at the premises of the second stage dealer, from whom the goods have been purchased by the appellant.

Since, the Department has not adduced any plausible evidence regarding non-receipt of the disputed goods by the a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

filed against the impugned order dated 8-4-2014 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), wherein duty demand and penalty confirmed in the adjudication order were upheld. 2. The reason for confirmation of the cenvat demand and imposition of penalty are that M/s. Aar Aar Technoplast Pvt. Ltd. has availed cenvat credit of ₹ 1,95,970/- on the basis of invoices without receiving the goods in the factory. The investigation conducted in this regard by the Department revealed that the first sta .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e, the ld. Consultant submitted the documents such as, payment vouchers, material receipt report, gate entry register etc. before the authorities below. However, no findings have been recorded either by the adjudicating authority or the first appellate authority regarding the documents submitted by the appellant. He further submits that the investigation conducted at the first stage dealer s premises, without conducting any investigation at the second stage dealer s end, cannot be the reason for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ealed that the vehicle has not been used for transportation of the goods from first stage dealer s premises to the second stage dealer. Ld. DR further submits that since the goods have not been supplied by the first stage dealer to the second stage dealer, there is no question of receipt of the goods by the appellant in their factory premises and thus, cenvat credit taken by the appellant is not admissible to them. 5. I have heard the ld. Counsels for both the sides and perused the records. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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