2016 (1) TMI 766

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... For the Respondent : Shri M R Sharma, DR ORDER Per Ashok Jindal The appellants are in appeals against the impugned order demanding duty and denying Cenvat Credit along with interest and imposing penalty on both the appellants. 2. The facts of the case are that M/s. Neelam Steels is a manufacturer of readymade garments. On specific information that appellant has shown fraudulent export of goo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Adjudicating authority and the adjudicating authority after examining all the documents has accepted the proof of export of the appellant with regard to invoice no, 102 and 105. He further submits that as with regard to invoice no 99, 100 and 101 the appellant has produced all the documents i.e. the shipping bill, permission of export and BRCs. Therefore, the allegation against the appellant ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on. As these facts are not in dispute, the only fact disputed by the Revenue is that the appellant has not complied with Condition 2(IV) of the notification no. 45/2001-CE(NT) dated 26.06.2001 to say that the goods after exit is allowed to be produced before the Nepalese Customs officers at the corresponding border check post along with original copy of the invoices. Thereafter, Nepalese customs o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rt the said goods to Nepal and thereafter shipping bills were filed and goods were presented before the Land custom station in India and the said goods were allowed to be exported to Nepal. Thereafter, appellant has received the payment. BRCs to that effect have also been produced by the appellant. These facts are not in dispute. The only dispute by the Revenue is that the appellant has not fulfil....