TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 1404
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the respondents are engaged in the manufacture and supply of machinery for sugar, cement, chemical and pharmaceutical units. They are registered with the Central Excise Department. On gathering intelligence, investigations were done and it was concluded by the Department that respondents are indulging in fraudulent availment of CENVAT credit on the basis of invoices received from their registered dealers. It was noticed by the Departmental officers that the specifications of materials (inputs) mentioned in the dealer s invoices did not match with the delivery challan issued by the manufacturer to the dealer. A show-cause notice was issued to the respondent alleging fraudulent availment of CENVAT credit on invoices without actual receipt/con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ealer. That the respondent having availed credit based on the invoices issued by the registered dealers on which duty has not been actually discharged by the manufacturers, the credit availed by the respondent is irregular. He relied upon the discussion made by the adjudicating authority in para 22 and 23 of the Order-in-original. 4. Against this, the learned counsel Shri M.V. Sridhar appearing on behalf of the respondent reiterated the findings of the Commissioner(Appeals). He submitted that the respondent has received the inputs after placing purchase orders and the description of the goods made in the invoices matched with the goods received by the respondent. That the Department has not adduced any evidence at the respondent s side t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... adjudicating authority has observed that the inputs supplied by the dealer are not the same as that were received from the original manufacturers under the Central Excise invoices. That the dealer has supplied different materials than that was received from the original manufacturer. That this is brought out from the descriptions and specifications of the materials mentioned in the delivery challan and the CENVAT invoices issued by the dealer to the respondent. After analysing the evidence as well as the submissions made by both sides, the Commissioner(Appeals) has arrived at the following conclusions to set aside the demand, interest and penalties. The same is worth reproducing as under:- 11. On careful consideration of the facts....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt other inputs i.e: inputs of different specifications once again leads to an inference that it was not the Appellants but the dealer, if it were so, had committed the offence. iv. The Appellants contention that they had availed CENVAT credit after due verification with the relevant details in the invoices of the first stage dealers also cannot be disputed. v. The observation of the original authority that the subject inputs supplied by the dealers were not the same as t hose received from the manufacturers under the Central Excise invoices certainly turns the needle of suspicion to the dealer, but not to the Appellants. vi. It is not the case of the department that the subject invoices were devoid of any of the ....