2018 (3) TMI 165

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 demands have been raised on two grounds. (A) For denial of cenvat credit on the ground that the dealer has issued bogus invoices for availment of cenvat credit by the appellant; and (B) For clandestine removal of goods. 2. The facts of the case are that on 07.07.2005, a search was conducted in the factory pr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of clandestine removal. The matter was adjudicated. During the course of adjudication, the cross examination of dealers was not considered, who had stated that their statement were recorded under threat and they have supplied the goods alongwith the invoices but the authorities below confirmed the demand by denying the cenvat credit and also the charge of clandestine removal of goods was upheld. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... goods along with invoice. Therefore, the said part of the demands is not sustainable. 4. The Id. AR reiterated the finding in the impugned order. 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. On consideration of the submission made by both the sides, the two issues emerges are: (A) Availment of cenvat credit on the invoices received by the dealers. (B) Clearance of goods ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ods and the statement of dealers has been contested and found in favour of the appellant, therefore, cenvat credit cannot be denied on the allegation that they have procured only invoices without supplying the goods to avail inadmissible cenvat credit. In view of the above, demand on account of denial of cenvat credit is set aside. (B). Clerance of goods clandestinely without payment of duty:- ....