TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (12) TMI 1125
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Appellant. Shri Brijesh Pathak, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER Revenue is in appeals against the respondents. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the main respondent M/s. Pioneer Industries purchased certain inputs from M/s. Swastik Metal Corporation and manufactured final products and cleared the same on payment of duty. The main respondent filed RT-12 returns regularly and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... said order, the Revenue is before me. 3. Heard both sides. 4. The learned AR submits that as per the statements of the transporters, the goods have not been transported to the factory of the respondents and the onus to prove that they have received the goods as mentioned in the invoices is on the respondents. He further submits that the main respondent should have been maintained ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uly accepted by the department and the demand has been raised by invoking extended period of limitation. He further submits that the inputs received by them being not full truck load, the transporters dispatched the goods in other vehicle which is going to Pune and therefore, the vehicle numbers are generally changes. To ascertain this fact, proper investigation has not been made. In these circums....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... factory of the main respondent. Vehicle No. was given in the invoices. Mode of transport of inputs into the factory of the main respondent has been explained but the same has been controverted by the Revenue. Further, all the payments of inputs procured by the respondent have been made through banking channel. I also find that there is no shortage or excess inputs are found in their factory durin....