TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 1172
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the manufacture of re-rolled products of iron and steel like shapes and sections, MS squares, CTD bars, MS flats etc. On 29.8.1995, one truck carrying finished goods was intercepted which was not accompanying any documents. The truck was brought back to the factory premises of the appellant wherein documents related to the said goods were found. Thereafter, the factory premises of the appellants were examined and various discrepancies were found. On the basis of those discrepancies, it was concluded that the appellants are engaged in the activity of clandestine removal of goods and availing Cenvat credit without bringing inputs in their factory. Consequently, the duty was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing that appellant has cleared the said goods against parallel parallel invoices. I have gone through the invoices produced before me. On going through the invoices, I find that the only difference on the invoices is of the signature of the consignor, whereas copy of the appellant signature has been signed by somebody else and on the copy of the transporter signature is signed by someone else. Revenue has alleged that the appellant is clearing goods on the strength of parallel invoices. But no investigation was conducted at the end of the buyer or the transporter to ascertain the fact whether on the strength parallel invoices, any goods have been transported or not? Further, on examination of the invoices in question, I find that the paral....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....firmed on the basis of the records seized from transporter viz. M/s. Super Handling Company showing the goods has been cleared without duty paying documents. I have gone through the documents seized from M/s Super Handling Company and those documents neither showing the date of goods sold nor the date has been mentioned to whom the goods has been sent and the appellant had not admitted those documents no enquiry has been conducted from M/s. Super Handling Company where these goods have been delivered or whether these goods have been loaded from the factory of the appellant without cover of invoice. In that circumstance, the demand of Rs. 2,11,273/- is not sustainable. Therefore, the same is set aside. (v) A demand of Rs. 5,62,513/- soug....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... but in some cases the buyers did not pay amount on due dates. Therefore, the debit notes have been issued for payment of interest. Revenue sought to include the payment of interest in the assessable value. The said issue has not been disputed by the ld. Counsel for the appellant being the issue of valuation. Therefore, the said demand of Rs. 1,16,542/- has been confirmed against the appellant. (viii) A demand of Rs. 61,824/- sought to be confirmed on account of invoices issued to consignee for availing Modvat credit without supply of inputs. I find that on this issue, the goods have been transferred from Bhilai Steel Plant to the appellant and during the transportation, in between, the goods have been unloaded from the truck and load....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....visit, the raw material was not found in the factory premises of the appellant. The contention of the appellant is that due to the rainy season, the raw material could not be stored in the open and the same was stored in the adjoining godown of their own and the same was found intact by the investigating team but the same has not been considered by the investigating team to ascertain the fact that the said input is the same input which was found short in the factory premises of the appellant. Moreover, the appellant has used the said raw material in manufacturing of their final goods. In that circumstances, the Cenvat credit cannot be denied to the appellant in the absence of any contrary evidence, therefore, Cenvat credit is allowed to t....