TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 560
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct of the case is that the case was made out for fraudulent availment of Cenvat credit by M/s. Rashtriya Metal Industries Ltd., on the invoices issued by Bhiwandi based dealer, viz., Nakoda Trading Corporation. The present appellants who are either transporter or partner of the transport firm were involved in the issuance of lorry receipts (LRs) against payment of Rs. 100/- as commission. These LR....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ICD Tughlakabad to Nakoda Trading Corporation, Bhiwandi, there is no fraudulent Cenvat Credit is involved. The fraudulent Cenvat credit was taken by Rashtriya Metal Industries Ltd. on the basis of invoices issued by Nakoda Trading Corporation. Therefore, the transaction whether right or wrong between ICD Tughlakabad to Nakoda Trading Corporation is not relevant to the fraudulent availment of Cenva....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... h) Vee Kay Enterprises - 2011 (266) ELT 436 (P&H) i) Sudhir Jivrajbhai Patel - 2010 (256) ELT 306 (Tri-Ahmd) j) Amex Alloys Pvt Ltd. - 2013 (296) ELT 229 (Tri Che) 4. I have carefully considered the submission made by both the sides. I find that on the appellants, the penalty under Rule 26 was imposed. Rule 26 reads as follows: "Rule 26. Penalty for certain offences. - (1) Any person wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 or refund, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding the amount of such benefit or five thousand rupees, whichever is greater. 5. In the facts of the present case, the charge on the appellants is that they have issued LRs for transportation between ICD Tughlakabad to Nakoda Trading Corporation, Bhiwandi. In my considered view the act of the appellants does not cover u....