2010 (12) TMI 1123

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n to the manufacture of finished products. On 15-12-2006, the Jurisdictional Central Excise officers made the surprise visit to the appellant's factory and checked the stock of cenvated inputs as well as capital goods. It was found that certain capital goods/machinery namely Transformer, Extruder and Transformer core winding Machine, in respect of which total capital goods Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 7,42,329/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Forty Two Thousand Three Hundred Twenty Nine) had been taken, were not their in the factory at all. Inquiry was made with Shri Rahul Mangal, Partner of the appellant and his statement was recorded on that day under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, wherein he admitted that said capital goods were neither ins....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant firm as well as partner Shri Rahul Mangal filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the order of the Joint Commissioner and the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal dated 6th March, 2009 upheld the Cenvat credit demand along with interest as well as penalty on the appellant firm, but set aside the penalty of Rs. 80,000/- imposed on Shri Rahul Mangal, Partner of the appellant firm. It is against this order of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the appellant firm has filed this appeal. 2. Heard both the sides. 2.1 Ms. Sukriti Das, Advocate, the learned Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that the capital goods, in question, after being received in the appellant's factory at C-61 (A), VKI Area, Jaipur, had bee....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., 2005 period, that is, about a year before the officer's visit to the factory, that as per the statement of Shri Rahul Mangal, Partner of the appellant firm these items of capital goods had never been installed in the factory at C-61 C, VKI Area, Jaipur, but had been installed in the other unit at E-54, Road No. 5, VKI Area, Jaipur, that while the appellant claim that the capital goods, in question, had been sent under a challan dated 14th December, 2006 to the other unit, at the time of officer's visit to the factory on 15th December 2006, Shri Rahul Mangal never told the officers that the cenvated capital goods had been sent to other unit for use in job work, that the appellant came up with the plea regarding sending of the capital goods....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hased by them during August 2005 to October 2005 period. There is also no dispute about the fact that at the time of officer's visit to the factory on 15-12-2006, these items of capital goods, in respect of the Cenvat credit had been taken, were neither installed in the factory nor was lying in loose condition and Shri Rahul Mangal, Partner of the appellant firm present at that time, in his statement recorded under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 stated that these capital goods were not installed in this factory and that the same were installed in the unit located at E-54, Road No. 5, VKI Area, which is unregistered unit and that, this was done due to shortage of space. At that time, he never told the departmental officers that t....