Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (3) TMI 96 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (3) TMI 96 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - 2016 (332) E.L.T. 870 (Tri. - Del.) - Denial of CENVAT credit - Cenvat Credit on the basis of the invoices issued by M/s. R. K. Enterprises - Held that:- In this case, it is no doubt, case has been booked on the statement of Shri R. K. Gupta proprietor of M/s. R. K. Enterprises who initially stated that he has merely issued the cenvitable invoices, on the basis of which respondent has taken the credit. In fact the respondent used to give payment of these invo .....

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, therefore, no cross examination is to be given. In fact, the statement of Shri R. K. Gupta has been retracted on the first available opportunity before chief metropolitan Magistrate. These things have not been considered by the adjudicating authority while adjudicating the matter.

As one of the transporter states that he is having three tempos and when these tempos used to transport the goods either he personally drives the tempos or he will be accompanying the driver of the tempo. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

SM) - Dated:- 22-6-2015 - SHRI ASHOK JINDAL, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) For the Petitioner : Shri B.B. Sharma, DR For the Respondent : Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate ORDER PER ASHOK JINDAL: The Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein Commissioner (A) has dropped the demand against the respondent. 2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent is manufacturer of Zinc Oxide. An investigation was conducted at the end of the supplier of the goods i.e. the first stage dealer M/s. R. K. Enterpri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uently, demand of duty along with interest and for imposition of penalty a show cause notice was adjudicated. Demands proposed in the show cause notice were affirmed. Aggrieved from the said order respondent appeared before the Ld. Commissioner (A), who set aside the proceedings against the respondent. Aggrieved from the said order Revenue is before me. 3. The Ld. AR submits that in this case Ld. Commissioner (A) has added while concluding his findings that no case is made out against the respon .....

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