9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 620X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er works suspension. For the orders placed by this factory to the overseas exporter when the consignment was imported, the clearance was made by this unit but was sent to their Pansukra unit after duly endorsing this fact behind the Bills of Entry. Accordingly, the materials were received and used by the Pansukra Unit who were taking the Cenvat Credit based on such endorsement behind the Bills of Entry. In 2008, the Appellant after informing the Jurisdictional AC, once again commenced their work operations at their B. T. Road factory unit. They imported five consignments of Lead Oxides which were cleared under five Bills of Entry. These consignments were duly received in the B. T. Road factory, accounted for in the RG 23 A Part 1 and Part I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aws our attention to the first verification report given by the Range Superintendent, Haldia-II Division dated 20/05/2010 and also to the second verification report given by Range Superintendent of Haldia-II Division dated 10/06/2011. These two verifications clarify that no Cenvat Credit was taken at Pansukra Unit and the goods in question were not received there ruling out the possibility of taking Cevat Credit. Based on these facts, the Learned Advocate submits that the impugned OIA is required to be set aside on merits. 3. He also submits that for the Credits taken by them during the period June and July 2008, the Show Cause Notice was issued much later on 10/02/2011 by invoking the proviso to Section 11A. Since all the Cenvat entries w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... why he has ignored the fact that this certificate also clearly states that no input materials have been received at the Pansukra Unit. He has also not considered the details of RG 23 A records produced by the Appellant. Had he taken the trouble of getting these facts verified and also taken a proper note of Certificates issued by the Range Superintendent, the litigation could have been closed at that point of time itself without having to make the Tribunal and Appellant to waste precious time to get the issue sorted out after so many years. We hold that the Appeal is allowed on merits. 7. Further it is seen that the Show Cause Notice has been issued after more than 3 years of Cenvat being taken by the Appellant. When Cenvat taken has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
