TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (3) TMI 1088
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se Tariff Act, 1985. During the relevant period, the appellants imported re-melting copper ingots and wire bars after purchasing the same on high sea sale basis, paid counterveiling duty (CVD) leviable thereon and availed the CENVAT Credit accordingly. The dispute in the present appeals relates to availment of credit of counterveiling duty paid by the appellant on the allegations and findings that the said inputs were actually not received by the appellants in their factories and the appellants have wrongly shown the receipt and consumption of the same in the manufacture of the final product, which was cleared on payment of duty. The allegations and findings are that the said imported ingots stand diverted by the appellants in the open market and instead they have purchased inferior quality goods from the market for replacing the imported inputs and used the same in the manufacture of their final product. 3. For arriving at the above finding, the adjudicating authority has mainly relied upon the fact that during the transportation of the ingots cleared from Delhi Customs to the factory premises located at Daman, the same has to be passed through various check posts. Enqui....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ods. There is also no evidence of receipt of any sale proceeds by the said appellants, there is no proof of transportation of imported goods to any other place, around Delhi border. There is no statement on record admitting that the goods have been sold in the local market. Further, the appellants have contended that admittedly they have manufactured the final product on which duty has been paid, thus indicating that the inputs in question were used by them. Further, the Department s suggestion that such inputs were procured from the local market as kabari scrap is also void of any merits inasmuch as the Department has not been able to establish, on record, any supplier of such kabari scrap or any evidence of purchase of the same or transportation of the same etc. As such, submits the ld.Advocate that the entire case of the Revenue is based upon mere presumptions and not on any concrete evidences on record. He also submits that import price of copper ingot and bars is almost equal to the market prices of copper scrap as such, appellants do not gain anything by substituting the copper ingots with the local material. Further, there is a specific ban on use of kabari scrap fixed vide ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....very after inspection in factory, fairly showed that the goods were transported to Daman and used in the manufacture of finished goods. He also submits that in the said reply, they have also placed evidence on record in the shape of reports received under RTI Act form the check post authorities to buttress their arguments that such reports are not reliable and even in admitted cases of transportation, the entries were not made. He has also pointed out to an alternative route of transportation through NH3 via Maharashtra border. Further, Central Government s report also stands relied upon to show that several transport vehicles run on fake/duplicate registration numbers and permits to avoid any fine and penalty as also to avoid mandatory passing by RTO authorities. It also stands contended in the written submissions that reliance on the statement of Shri Praveen B. Agarwal, Head of Accounts department of the transporter at Ahmedabad, who was not connected with the transportation, was not justified. 5. Shri J.S. Negi, ld.SDR appearing for the Revenue has reiterated the reasonings adopted by the Commissioner in his impugned order for holding against the appellant. However, h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r of Commissioner(Appeals) remanding the matter to adjudicating authority following the earlier order of the Tribunal vide which the matters were remanded, was challenged. The Tribunal, taking note of the fact that all other connected matters stand remanded to Commissioner, remanded the said matter also to Commissioner for decision along with the earlier remanded matters vide Tribunal s Order No.A/1485-1509/WZB/AHD/2008, dt.1.8.08 (which now stand set aside by Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat and matter remanded for fresh decision). It is seen that the Tribunal s order reported in 2009 (245) ELT 449 (Tri-Ahmd) was further appealed against by the Revenue before Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CCE Vs. Rikhab Mehta as reported in 2010 (259) ELT 518 (Guj). The appeal filed by Revenue was rejected. It is further noted that while remanding the present matter, Hon'ble High Court has directed that the Tribunal may consider the subsequent order of this Court passed in Tax Appeal No.1554 of 2009 on 16.9.10 i.e. the decision reported in 2010 (259) ELT 518 (Guj). Foe better appreciation, we reproduce Para 6 of their judgment. 6. From the facts noted hereinabove, it is appar....