2013 (1) TMI 412

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cord, M/s J.L.Autoparts are engaged in the manufacture of auto parts and were availing the benefit of Cenvat credit of duty paid on the inputs. The said inputs were being received by them from two registered dealers, i.e., M/s Arvind Enterprises and M/s Avon Steels (India) under the cover of Cenvatable invoices being issued by the said two dealers. The said two dealers received the inputs from M/s Haryana Steel & Alloys Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as HSAL).   3. Investigations were conducted at the end of HSAL by the officers of DGCEI and during the course of investigation, it transpired that HSAL were issuing the invoices of carbon steel billets, alloys and MS billets to various manufacturers without actually supplying the goods.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....M/s J.L.Autoparts was recorded on 20.12.08. Shri Sharma deposed that they were supplying their final product to M/s Honda Motorcycle & Scooters India P.Ltd and M/s India Yamaha Motors P.Ltd. They have procured the raw material from two dealers under the cover of invoices. On being questioned, he categorically deposed that they have received the material from the said two dealers and the suggestion that no material was received, is actually incorrect. However, he agreed to deposit the Cenvat credit so availed by them.   6. On the above basis, proceedings were initiated against the appellant for confirmation of demand by denying the Cenvat credit on the basis of invoices issued by M/s Arvind Enterprises and M/s Avon Steels (India). No....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... not supplying the goods. The said statement of Shri Rawat does not stand agreed upon by the two dealers, i.e., M/s Arvind Enterprises and M/s Avon Steels. In his statement Shri Arvind Tiwari, authorised signatory of said two dealers have clearly deposed that they were receiving the goods from HSAL along with the invoices. It is not the Revenue s case that HSAL was not manufacturing the raw material or were clearing/diverting their final product to other persons. Further the statement of Shri Tiwari stands corroborated by the statement of Shri K.K.Sharma of the manufacturing unit, M/s J.L.Autoparts. It is also seen that all the payments were made to the dealers by cheque and there is no allegation much less any proof of flow back of the mon....