2017 (6) TMI 634

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ashok Jindal The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the cenvat credit was denied to the appellant for the shortage detected by Income Tax Department on 20.03.2007. 2. The facts of the case are that the income tax survey was conducted at the factory premises of the appellant on 20.03.2007, wherein, some shortage was detected which was intimated by the Income Tax Depart....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ause notice was not required to be issued. He further submits that although on 20.03.2007, the Income Tax Department detected certain shortage of goods but the same was explained to the income tax department and on the basis of explanation furnished by the appellant, the proceedings were closed by the Income Tax Department. It is submits that on the basis of shortage of goods recorded by the Incom....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ther investigation was conducted by the Revenue to find out from the Income Tax Department, whether the shortage which was detected by them, any action taken against the appellant by the Income Tax Department or not? 7. Merely, alleging the shortage of input on the basis of survey conducted by the Income Tax Department, without any corroborative evidence of shortage of inputs, the allegation is....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nal in the case of Ravi Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Hyderabad [2011 (266) ELT 399 (Tri. Bang.) has held that the information received from the Income Tax Department cannot be made the sole basis for confirmation of demand under the Central Excise when the Central Excise Authorities in their investigation did not find any corroborative evidence of clandestine removal of their final products. ....