9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 549X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DER Per: S.K. Mohanty These appeals are directed against the impugned order dated 31.01.2012 passed by the Commissioner, Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, Indore, wherein penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/- each were imposed on the appellants under Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. 2. Brief facts of the case are that Cenvat credit taken by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the said party was dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground of non-prosecution. The said party has not filed any further application for revival of the appeal. The present two appellants have filed the appeal against imposition of penalties. Shri Sunil Kothari is the Director of M/s. Laxmi Pipes & Fittings Pvt. Ltd. and the other appellant Shri Mukesh Sangla is the Director of SOL, who is alleg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Department has mainly proceeded against the statement dated 06.12.2007 recorded from Shri Mukesh Sangla, the M.D. of M/s. SOL, wherein he has specifically stated that without supplying the goods only invoices were issued, facilitating availment of Cenvat Credit, that he also stated before the Departmental Officers that the Cenvat Credit was returned by those buyers in cash. Thus, the ld. D.R. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nly fabricated documents, I am of the view that similar treatment can be adopted for appellant Shri Mukesh Sangla, inasmuch as, he was also the appellant before the Tribunal in the case booked against M/s. Parag Pentachem Pvt. Ltd. Since the Tribunal upon consideration of the facts has dropped the penalty imposed on Shri Mukesh Sangla vide order dated 17.06.2015, holding that he has no role in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Parag Pentachem Pvt. Ltd. and Askas Plastics Pvt. Ltd., for deciding the present issue, such statement cannot be taken into contingence in view of the facts that the statements were discarded by the Tribunal on earlier occasions. Further, the Department has also not filed any appeal against the order dated 26.05.2015 and 23.06.2016 passed by the Tribunal. 8. In view of above, I do not find any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
