2018 (2) TMI 615

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dayal Heda has not received the goods by the principal manufacturers/dealers, therefore, had issued bogus invoices to avail inadmissible cenvat credit. On the of this allegation, cenvat credit sought to be denied to the respondents and it was also proposed to impose penalties on the respondents. The adjudicating authority denied the cenvat credit to the respondents. Consequently, duty was demanded alongwith interest and penalties were also imposed on all the respondents. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondents approached to the Ld. Commissioner (A), who dropped the charges against the respondents, relying on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner Vs. Dhanlaxmi Tubes & Metal Industries - 2012 (282) ELT 20....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ondents have received the goods against the invoices which show the particulars as per Rule 9 of the CCR, 2004, therefore, respondents are entitled to avail cenvat credit of duty paid by them. It is not a duty for the respondents to investigate the particulars of manufacturer/supplier to ascertain the fact that manufactured supplier had supplied the goods to the dealers. In those circumstances, the cenvat credit to the respondents cannot be denied. 8. Further, I find that the issue has been examined by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dhanlaxmi Tubes & Metal Industries (supra) wherein the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court observed as under:- "4. A perusal of the record of the case shows that the detailed facts as regards the investi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l records maintained at the check post indicate receipt of copper. Merely because in the record of the transporter, two types of LRs had been issued in respect of the goods carried/transported by M/s. Singal Road Carriers which indicated transportation of miscellaneous goods and the other which indicated transportation of copper ingots/wire brass, the Department has jumped to the conclusion that copper ingots had not actually been transported. Except for the aforesaid evidence, there is no evidence whatsoever to indicate that M/s. Pranav Metal Mart, Nadiad had not received copper ingots or that the respondent assessee had not received the ingots along with the invoices. The statement of Shri Atul Navrattan Lal Sharma, Proprietor of M/s. Sin....