9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 185X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dulently availing Cenvat Credit without receipt of duty paid inputs. Intelligence revealed that some importers of Delhi are importing remelted Copper ingots from Sri Lanka at concessional rate of duty which were cleared from ICD, Tughlaquabad, New Delhi and consumed in the units located in and around Delhi but duty paid invoices are being issued to the registered dealers to the manufacturers located in Gujarat and Daman who availed Cenvat Credit without receipt of inputs. In respect of present appellant thorough investigation was conducted by DGCEI and on that basis, it was alleged that the appellant are availing Cenvat Credit on the duty paid invoices issued by registered dealers namely, M/s. Pranav Metal Mart, Nadiad without receipt of go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of dealer to the premises to the appellant. Hence, the allegation cannot be sustained. He submits that the dealer has maintained respective register and is also filing returns which are not in dispute. As regard the allegation of the department that consignment are not recorded in the registers maintained by the said transporter at his Ahmedabad Office, the concerned person maintaining the register has admitted during the course of cross-examination that they were not making entry of goods which were to be delivered directly to the customer. In other words, the lorry receipts which were marked as Door Delivery were not being entered in the register maintained by them. In support of his submission he placed reliance on the following judgm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CISE, CHANDIGARH 2009 (235) ELT 577 (SC) in the Supreme Court of India. * GORAN PHARMA PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., BHAVNAGAR 2010 (250) ELT 57 (Tri. Ahmd) in the CESTAT, WEST ZONAL BENCH, AHMEDABAD. 3.3 He further submits that a penalty under rule 26 was imposed upon Shri Navratan Lal Sharma, the proprietor. He submits that the department has not recorded statement of this transporter, hence, penalty imposed is bad in law. He submits that in any case this transporter was not involved in transporting material from the premises of registered dealer to the premises of the main noticee and hence, the provision of Rule 26 cannot be made applicable. In this regard he placed reliance on the following judgments :- * JAI NARAIN VER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
