TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 1322
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... duty exemption under Notification No.203/92-Cus dated 19/05/1992 against transferable value based Advance License which were acquired by the appellants as transferees. On 20th March 2004, the appellants received a recovery letter dated 18/03/2004 seeking to recover duty and penalty confirmed by order-in-original No.1264/2000/CAC/ CC/SPSP dated 17/10/2000 passed by the Commissioner (Export), Mumbai. The appellant by letter dated 23/03/2004 requested the department for a copy of the said order and the show-cause notice, if any, in respect of which such order was passed since the appellants had not received the said order or any show cause notice or intimation of hearing. By letter dated 25/03/2004 the Assistant Commissioner provided copies o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vailed input stage credit on the input; the onus of proof is cast on the appellant while it is the duty of the department when it was alleged that the appellant had not complied with the condition of notification of non-availment of modvat credit. It is his submission that the Apex Court in the case of Auto Ignition Ltd. 2008 (226) ELT 14 in para 9 has settled the law wherein the Apex Court has said that onus to prove that the assessee had availed modvat credit was on the Revenue. It is his submission that identical views has been expressed by various benches in the following case laws: a) Sunbeam Garments Pvt. Ltd. 2012 (284) ELT 709 b) Diamond Polyprints 2016 (332) ELT 883 c) Silverwing Investment & Trading & Co. 2002 (149) ELT 601 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ny the allegation by providing the evidence in support of his claim. 7. On consideration of the submissions made by both sides and perusal of records, we find that the appellant is a transferee of the licences which were issued to the original manufacturer exporter. The said licenses are genuine and there is no allegation that these licenses were procured by forging the documents or the licenses were forged. The licenses were produced by the appellant before the authorities in 1994 while clearing the goods imported and claimed the exemption as per the licenses. It is a case of the Revenue that the appellant is ineligible to avail the benefit of notification No.203/92 as they could have availed the modvat credit on inputs in respect of the ....