TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 2449
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ufacturer of Aluminium Ingots (Small Ingots) from aluminium scrap in a coal fired hand operated small furnace. It was found that there are no manufacturing activities. Shri Gautam Pal, proprietor of the said firm, in his statement dated 28.3.2005 and the other statements admitted that he had fraudulently issued the invoices to facilitate the CENVAT credit to the other manufacturers. Thereafter, the Central Excise officers visited the appellants factory on 08.4.2005, who is engaged in the manufacture of Anhydrous Aluminium Chloride classifiable under heading 28.27 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, and availed cenvat credit on the basis of invoices issued by the said Firm. After verification of records, documents and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... taken reasonable steps as per Rule 7, Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001/2002/ 2004. He submits that the issue is squarely covered by the following decisions:- (a) M/s. Bhagwati Silk Mills - Order No. A/55-185/WZB/AHD/ 2011 dated 23.11.2010 /24.01.2011. (b) Prayagraj Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Limited vs. UOI 2013 (290) ELT 61 (Guj.) (c) CCE & Cus. vs. D.P. Singh 2011 (270) ELT 321 (Guj.) (d) Minakshi Fashion Pvt. Limited vs. CCE & Cus., Surat 2015 (322) ELT 174 (Guj.) 3. On the other hand, the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the adjudicating authority. He submits that the Tribunal has already decided identical issue in the case of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fore, the appellant is not eligible to avail credit on the fake invoices. 5. The learned Advocate strongly relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Prayagraj Dyeing & Printing Mills Pvt. Otd (supra). In that case, the invoices issued by the dealers were a valid piece of document at the time of clearance of the goods. In this context, the Hon'ble High Court held that the demand is barred by limitation. The decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of D.P. Singh (supra) is in the context of rebate claim on the exported goods. So, the facts of the said case are different from the present case and would not apply in the present case. We find that the decision of the Tribunal in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Mum.)]. The following observation is relevant which is reproduced for better appreciation: "In the present case the manufacturers being in the knowledge of the fact that the credit was travelling only on the basis of the invoices without actual travel of the inputs is established from the statements of the various persons recorded during the course of investigation. As such, we do not find any force in the appellant plea of the demand being barred by limitation. It is further seen that in the said decision of IDL Chemical Limited, the Tribunal observed that the credit taken on the basis of the fake and no genuine duty paying documents is required to be reversed. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the reversal of credit b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iod of limitation will apply in this case as the entire modus operandi of passing on the credit by M/s Itisha, without having manufacturing unit, only on documentary evidence and even without paying the same to Government of India, has been un-earthed after detailed investigation, a fraud committed by M/s Itisha. It is well settled that fraud vitiates everything and disadvantage of such fraud cannot be taken by anyone. 9. In my considered view, once there is no dispute as regards ineligible CENVAT Credit availed by the manufacturers and manufacturing units and the same being reversed on being pointed out, the penalties on the manufacturing unit and the manufacturer under the provisions of Rule 15 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 are co....