TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o deny Cenvat Credit to the appellants on the basis of fact that the registered dealer from whom the goods have been procured by the appellants found to be non-existent. It is not the case of the Department hat appellants have not received the goods. In fact, no investigation has been conducted at the end of the appellants to ascertain they have received the goods or not. Revenue has not made any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellants are in appeals against the impugned orders demanding duty alongwith interest and imposing penalty by denying Cenvat Credit on input to the appellants. 2. The facts of the case are that during the period 23.08.2007 to 20.09.2007, the appellants procured pig iron (input) from M/s. Rohit Ispat a registered dealer who procured goods from IDCOL, Kalinga, Iron Works Ltd., Barbil, Orissa, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rest were confirmed by denying Cenvat Credit availed by the appellants on the strength of the invoices issued by M/s Rohit Ispat and penalties were also imposed. Aggrieved from the said orders, the appellants are before me. 3. The Ld. Counsels for the appellants submit that the appellants have received the goods in their factory and same has been used in the manufacture of their final product. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s bogus or not. Appellants have received the goods and taken the Cenvat Credit thereon. No cross examination of the registered dealer was granted to reveal the truth. 4. On the other hand, Ld. AR reiterated the observation made by the lower authorities in the impugned order. 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. In these cases, the department sought to deny Cenvat Cre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
