TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 1007X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainst M/s Bhagwati Trading Company (first Stage dealer) and M/s Jagdamba Metal Store (second stage dealer). On the basis of such investigation an opinion was formed that the first stage dealer and second stage dealer have passed cenvat credit to the appellant without actual delivery of the goods. Accordingly a show cause notice was issued to the appellant alleging that cenvat credit amounting to Rs.8,74,357/- had been availed of without actually receiving goods. The demand was confirmed by the adjudicating authority vide order dated 01.04.2010. Such demand was confirmed by the Appellant Authority. An allegation of fraud must necessarily be proved by the person who levels such an allegation. Where, however, the department succeeds in prim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that had been filed by the appellant - matter on remand. - C.E.A. Nos. 65 and 66 of 2014 (O & M) - - - Dated:- 14-10-2022 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Present:- Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate for the appellant(s) (in both the appeals). Mr. Tajender K. Joshi, Advocate for respondent(s) (in both the appeals). ****** TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA, J. (ORAL) This order shall dispose of CEA No.65 of 2014 titled as M/s Anurag Alloys Die Cast (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Faridabad and CEA No.66 of 2014 titled as M/s Jagdamba Metal Store Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Faridabad. Since both matters are connected, for the sake of brevity, facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t amounting to Rs.8,74,357/- had been availed of without actually receiving goods. The demand was confirmed by the adjudicating authority vide order dated 01.04.2010. Such demand was confirmed by the Appellant Authority. Thereafter the final order dated 30.08.2013 (Annexure A-1) has been passed by the Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi and which in turn has led to the filing of CEA No.65-2014. Suffice it to notice that CEA No.66-2014 is at the hands of 2 nd stage dealer i.e. M/s Jagdamba Metal Store in consonance with the order dated 30.08.2013 (Annexure A-1) passed by Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi and as appended as Annexure A-1 in CEA No.65 of 2014. We find that in CEA No.65-2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ifferent mode of transport mentioned in purchase invoices, various documents i.e. fraudulent GR books/receipts, rubber stamps etc. recovered from the office of Shri R.K.Gupta but without a detailed reference to the appellant's transactions, part of the statement by Shri R.K.Gupta exonerating the appellant and without examining for RG 23-A part I, RG 23-A part II, details in cenvat return filed under Rule 57 A(c) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and RG 12 submitted to the Central Excise Department, Faridabad. The mere fact that the appellant purchased goods from Shri R.K.Gupta, would not by itself raise an inference of culpability or wrong doing. We, therefore, allow the appeal, set aside the order passed by the CESTAT and remit the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
