2014 (3) TMI 204

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lassifiable under sub-heading 73251000 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. On 15.02.2008, the Central Excise Officers visited their factory and found that during the period 16.10.2004 to 20.11.2006, Appellant No.1 availed Cenvat credit on the basis of invoices under the description of CR Sheets and Coils and, HR Sheets and Coils, MS Wire Coils and Plates issued by the dealers, namely, M/s. Santosh Kumar Steels and M/s. Sri Amman Steels Appellants No.4 and 5. It was found that the dealers had not delivered the goods as per the description of invoices and actually supplied MS Scraps. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of duty of Rs.4,01,031/- along with interest and penalty of equal amount of duty under Section 11AC of the Ce....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ture of scrap which they have actually received and paid the amount to the dealers. He also submits that they have paid duty amount along with the value of the goods to the dealers and, therefore, there is no reason to deny the credit to them. He submits that all these materials as described in the invoices were received in a cut-into-pieces form, which are similar to the description of invoices. He also submits that they have complied with all the procedure in respect of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. He submits that the adjudicating authority had not given any option for deposit of the penalty of 25% under proviso to Section 11AC of the Act. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of K.P. Pouches Pvt. Ltd. Union of I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e penalty on the dealers equal to duty. 08. After considering the submissions of both sides, I find that the dealers in their statement accepted that they have supplied MS Scrap and raised invoices on MS Coils, Rounds etc., to Appellant No.1, the manufacturer for claiming the benefit of Cenvat credit in violation of the Cenvat Credit Rules. It is also noted that the manufacture knowing fully well that they have not received the goods as per description of the invoices they have availed the credit, which is totally irregular. Hence, the demand of duty along with penalties on the manufacture and the dealers are justified. I find that on an identical issue, the Tribunal in the case of Amex Alloys (supra) upheld the demand of duty and penalt....