TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (3) TMI 566
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owever, for facilitation, the facts have been extracted from GCR No. 18 of 2004 titled as "Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh v. Khalsa Charan Singh and Sons". 2. The matrix of facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal, of present reference petitions and emanating from the record is that the respondent-assessee M/s. Khalsa Charan Singh and sons (for brevity "the assessee") was dealing in old rollable material/re-rollable material and scrap. A show cause notice was issued to the assessee, proposing to deny proforma credit availed by it under the modvat scheme, on the ground that as the "old rollable material/re-rollable material and scrap" is not specified in the Government of India's Order No. B-22/5/86-TRU, d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Notification No. 55/86 dated 10-2-86 has been claimed and documentary evidence exist to show that reduced duty has been paid on such inputs. In such cases, only actual duty paid could be allowed. Revenue has not led any evidence to prove that these exceptions were attracted in the case of the impugned goods. Therefore, the burden of establishing duty paid character cannot be passed on to the Appellants herein. Further, the dispute of duty paid character of the goods has been raised by the Revenue and if the Revenue has any doubt about the duty paid character of the goods, the burden to prove so rests squarely on the Revenue. The Tribunal also observed that it was not the contention of the Revenue that the disputed goods were otherwise co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ular No. 18/89 dated 6-6-1989, the contention of the assessee that burden of proof is on the revenue, in this regard, has considerable force. 7. It is not a matter of dispute that the assessee was dealing in old rollable material/re-rollable material and scrap and the indicated inputs purchased by it (assessee) were being used in the manufacturing of final products, at the relevant time. The Govt. of India's order dated 7-4-1986 clearly postulates that "any goods purchased from outside and lying in the stock on or after 1986 with the assessee manufacturing the final products specified in the Notification No. 177/88 dated 1-3-1988, are deemed to have paid the specified duty at the specified rate. Therefore, the assessee would be deemed to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ny fact, it is said that burden of proof lies on that person and the burden of proof in the proceedings lies on that person, who would fail if no evidence at all was given on either side. As indicated earlier, the dispute of duty paid character of the goods has been raised by the revenue and if the revenue has any doubt about duty paid character of the goods, then the burden of proof so raised squarely lies on the revenue. 10. As is evident from the order dated 7-4-1986 that the goods purchased from outside and lying in stock on or after 1986 with the assessee manufacturing the final products specified in the notification dated 1-3-1988, are deemed to have paid the specified duty at the specified rate. Hence, the assessee was entitled to....