Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Filter Manufacturing Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata-III

2016 (1) TMI 844 - CESTAT KOLKATA

Cenvat Credit - Genuineness of the transaction not proved - Held that:- The appellant failed to establish through cogent evidences that the materials mentioned in the respective invoices were received and the duty amount mentioned in the said invoices were also paid to the treasury by the input supplier. Now, before me also, the ld.Advocate for the appellant could not place any of these documents except Xerox copy of one demand draft of ₹ 1.00 Lakh drawn in favour of M/s.Three F-Filters (P .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

NO.FO/A/75047/2016 - Dated:- 7-1-2016 - Dr. D.M.Misra, Member(Judicial) For the Petitioner : Shri A.K.Banerjee, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri S.S.Chatterjee, Supdt.(AR) ORDER Per Dr. D.M.Misra. 1. This is an appeal against Order-in-Appeal No.237/Kol-III/2011 dated 09.08.2011 passed by the Commissioner(Appeal-I) of Central Excise, Kolkata. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the appellant has been engaged in the manufacture of different kinds of Industrial Filters falling under ch .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd rejected their appeal. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred an appeal before this Tribunal and this Tribunal by its order No.A-1819/KOL/2007 dated 10.10.2007 remanded the matter to the original authority to ascertain the genuineness of the transaction between the appellant and the input supplier by allowing the Appellant place the relevant evidences and also if necessary, through cross-examination of the witnesses. Pursuant to the said order, the Additional Commissioner of Cen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

thority has confirmed the demand with interest and imposed equivalent penalty. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant preferred appeal before the ld.Commissioner(Appeals), who in turn upheld the de novo order and rejected the appeal. Hence, the present appeal. 3. The ld.Advocate Shri A.K.Banerjee for the appellant submits that there has been gross violation of principles of natural justice as they were noither supplied with all the documents nor their submissions advanced during the course of hear .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ce evidences, they failed to bring out any material evidences, therefore, the authorities below had rejected their contention of receipt of input material against the fake invoices and confirmed the demand. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. I find this is the second round of litigation before this Tribunal. Earlier this Tribunal after recording the fact that the appellant was prevented from adducing sufficient evidences, remanded the matter to the jurisdictional authority to allow pro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version