TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 201
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al of Central Excise Intelligence, Bangalore Zone. They carried out detailed investigation wherein it was found that the Appellant had availed Cenvat Credit in respect of 14 invoices which were shown issued by dealer namely M/s Dhan Laxmi Steels, Raipur. In the Investigation it was revealed that at the relevant time M/s Dhan Laxmi Steel was not operating their business. The entries made in RG-23 D register in respect of the same invoices were found incorrect. The source of the material from the manufacturer was also found bogus which shows that the fake invoices were issued by M/s Dhan Laxmi Steel without supply of goods. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand against M/s Mohit Ispat Ltd. and imposed penalties of equal amount of du....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Credit was wrongly denied. The Appellant have complied with provision of Rule 9 (3) and Rule 9 (5) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as they have taken reasonable steps to satisfy themselves about the identity and address of the supplier issuing invoices evidencing payment of duty.He submits that credit is eligible to the Appellant and cannot be denied on account of procedural lapse committed by the supplier, if any. In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the following judgments: (i) Commissioner Vs. Motibhai Iron & Steel Industries [2005(316) E.L.T. 374 (Guj.)] (ii) SMI Electrowire Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C.Ex., Delhi [2015 (322) E.L.T.] (P&H) (iii) Shakti Steel Rolling Mills Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Chandigarh ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. He placed reliance on the following decisions:- (i) Hitesh Kumar Patel Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai [2009 (245) ELT 858 (Tri.)] (ii) Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh-I Vs. Mini Steel Traders [2014 (309) ELT 404 (P&H)] (iii) Commr. Of C. Ex. & S.T. Chandigarh-I Vs. Asim Enterprises [2015 (328) ELT 658 (Tr)] (iv) Vee Kay Enterprises Vs.Commissioner of Central Excise [ 2011(266) ELT 436 (P&H) ] 3. Shri S.R. Nair, Ld. Examiner (A.R.) appearing on behalf of Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records. I find that the fraud committed by the supplier M/s Dhanlaxmi Steels, Raipur in as much as they is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of returning the cash to the Appellant. Thus such activity was very much in connivance with the Appellant who is also based in Goa. This clearly show that the account of M/s. Dhanlaxmi Steels was maintained in Goa for convivance of withdrawing the cash so that the same can be handed over to the Appellant. In the facts and circumstances of case it is established that the Appellant was very much party to the fraud committed by M/s Dhanlaxmi Steels. In such situation, the Appellants submission regarding receipt of input and use thereof in production is of no help to them. Even if it is accepted that Appellant have received the input, since it has no linkage with duty payment by the manufacturer the credit on fake invoices cannot be allowed. ....