TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 137X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that they have actually supplied the goods to the appellant which was used by him in or in relation to the manufacture of the goods. Both the authorities below have not considered the documentary evidence produced by the appellant to prove his case. In LUXMI METAL INDUSTRIES VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-II [ 2013 (3) TMI 143 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] , it was held that once goods are supplied against proper cenvatable invoice, buyer cannot go beyond that and verify whether registered dealer had purchased the goods legally. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Excise Appeal No. 60249 Of 2022 - A/60003/2023 - Dated:- 31-1-2023 - MR. S.S. GARG , MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Ram Chander Choudhary, Advocate for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e submitted by the appellant before the authorities below. He further submitted that he has produced sufficient evidence of receipt of inputs alongwith invoices issued by the registered dealer which sufficiently prove that they have received the goods mentioned in the invoices issued by the registered dealers, namely, M/s AI M/s MA. He further submitted that the said goods were used by the appellant in their factory in or in relation to the manufacture of dutiable goods which is proved by the records, namely, relevant excise invoices, Copy of RG-23A Part I, payment through banking Channel etc. He further submitted that both the authorities below are not correct in relying on the statements of third parties who have no direct dealing with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... both the parties and perusal of material on record, I find that the appellant has produced sufficient records in the form of invoices alongwith transport documents and other records showing the receipt of raw-material/input register, RG23A Part-I and also the proof of payment through the banking channel. I also find that in the statement dated 11.08.2016 of Shri Brij Bhusan jain, Accountant of M/s AI and dt. 17.08.2016 of Shri Raj Kumar, Excise in-charge of M/s M/A (copies of which are on record) clearly support the fact that they have actually supplied the goods to the appellant which was used by him in or in relation to the manufacture of the goods. Both the authorities below have not considered the documentary evidence produced by the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
