TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 921
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the appellant is now closed. The main raw materials for manufacture of acid slurry are: linear alkyle benzene (hereinafter referred to as LAB), oleum and water. All the said three raw materials are very much essential for the manufacture of finished goods. The appellant was availing Modvat credit of duty paid on the raw materials after filing necessary statutory declarations before the concerned authorities. There was no discrepancy either in respect of raw materials in stock or in the matter of availment of Modvat credit by the appellant. The periodical returns in Form RT-12, were being filed and assessed by the concerned Range Superintendent. 4. There was an inspection at the premises of the appellant by the Directorate General of Anti-Evasion, Hyderabad on 13-04-1994 and certain records were seized. The statements of the certain persons were recorded. Based on the inspection and the information obtained, a show-cause notice dated 20-01-1995 was issued alleging that the appellant had not accounted for purchase of raw material namely, LAB made from a public sector organization by name, M/s.Tamil Nadu Petro Products (hereinafter referred to as TPL) 5. The appellant s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Tribunal was right in affirming the findings of the Commissioner that there was a material in the case with respect to purchase of LAB in the third parties names by the appellant used in manufacture of acid slurry by the appellant and whether the findings of the Tribunal are perverse and based on no material ? 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in not accepting the arguments of the appellant that extended period of limitation cannot be applied ? 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Tribunal suffers from the illegality in not considering the claim of the appellant for modivat credit, which is alleged to have purchased and used in third parties names on account of the fact that duty on the manufacture of acid slurry was being demanded from the appellant ? 9. Sri S.Ravi, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the order of the Tribunal is purely based on surmises and conjectures and there is no material whatsoever evidencing purchase of LAB by the appellant and the same having been received in the Factory by the appellant. Further, he would sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ribunal. He would further submit that inasmuch as there was a suppression of huge turnover and clandestine manufacture excisable goods carried on by the appellant, the invocation of the provisions of extended period of limitation cannot be found fault with. He would also submit that there is no justifiable reason for the appellant to be allowed with modvat credit, as there is no material evidencing purchase of the raw material by the appellant. 11. We have considered the rival submissions. 12. A perusal of the order of the Commissioner would reveal that during investigation and enquiry, the manager of the appellant and also one Sri B.Damodar Rao, GPA Holder of the appellant had admitted that they have received certain quantities of LAB from the stock point of TPC in the name of various fictitious/non-existing customers and utilized the same for the manufacture and clearances of unaccounted Acid Slurry. Documents 18, 19, 20 and 49 which were seized from the registered office of the appellant were relied upon for this purpose. The documents revealed for the period between February, 1990 and April, 1993. Quantities of Acid Slurry were produced and cleared and there was a huge di....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion No.1 is required to be answered in the negative and against the appellant. 15. In the light of the findings recorded by the authorities below that there was suppression of manufacture and removal of dutiable product applying the extended period of limitation cannot be faulted and in that view of the matter, question No.2 is also required to be answered in the negative and against the appellant. 16. The very premise on which a show-cause notice was issued resulting in the adjudication order fastening liability of the excise duty, is that appellant had in fact purchased raw material in 27 third parties names and utilized the said raw material in manufacture of a dutiable product and cleared the finished product without payment of duty. In the process of adjudication the authorities recorded a finding that in fact the appellant was involved in procurement of raw material and manufacture and sale of dutiable product and demanded tax. It is not in dispute that in normal circumstances the appellant would have been eligible to avail modvat credit on the purchase of LAB, raw material, which was used in the manufacture of the dutiable product. The modvat credit is sought to be de....