2014 (7) TMI 354

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant Description Amount of Penalty Imposed 1 E/58814/2013 Jagruti Resin Pvt Ltd (JRPL) First stage dealer Rs.1,03,015/- 2 E/58822/2013 Awadh Pratap Naryan Singh Authorized representative of SSI Rs.10,000/- 3 E/58823/2013 Arvind K Doshi CEO of JRPL Rs.10,000/- 4 E/58824/2013 Shree Sai International (SSI) Second stage dealer Rs.1,03,015/- 5 E/58825/2013 Jitender Kumar Authorized representative of JRPL     S. No. Appeal No. Appellant Description Amount of Penalty Imposed 1 E/58815/2013 Jagruti Resin Pvt Ltd (JRPL) First stage dealer Rs.1,95,970/- 2 E/58830/2013 Arvind K Joshi CEO of JRPL Rs.60,000/- ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....50/CE/Appeal/DLH-IV/2013 dated 17.4.2013 wherein Orders-in-Original No.16/AC/Demand/Div-V/12-B were upheld. Adjudicating Authority has confirmed the duty against M/s Astron Polymers (P) Ltd and imposed penalties as detailed above. It is observed that, it is a case where Jagruti Resins, a registered dealer passed on inadmissible/fraudulent cenvat credit to various manufacturers and second stage dealers by way of issuing cenvatable invoices without actually sending any goods. One such second stage dealer, SSI was also involved in such transactions. The following manufacturers ultimately availed such 'paper credit': S. No. Manufacturer who availed cenvat credit Duty involved in the transaction (Rupees) 1 Astron Polymers ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ned D.R. reiterates the findings of departmental authorities. 6. I have considered the submissions from both the sides and also perused the case records. The findings of lower authorities suggest that dealers have indulged in the issuance of bogus invoices showing transport of goods in the vehicles which were not capable of doing so. The statement of owner/driver of the vehicle numbers HR 55 0076 and HR 55 H 7767 reinforced the claim of revenue that discrepancies were found in the records maintained by drivers of the respective vehicles and the appellants. Modus operandi as described in detail in adjudication orders is referred below:     "(vii) M/s JRPL, appellant no. 1, who issued bogus cenvatable invoices to appellan....