2018 (3) TMI 626

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mber 2012 to December 2013 has been denied. 2. Petitioner is a company engaged in the manufacture of excisable goods viz., pre-fabricated stainless steel structures like hand railing, skirting, metal walls, doors and hinge plates, F & B Supply, green wall and other decorative items. Petitioner was registered with the respondent-Authority. It transpires that the petitioner was served with show cause notice dated 20.6.2014 issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mangalore proposing to demand excise duty of Rs. 71,81,414/- with interest and penalties under Section 11-AC of the Central Excise Act. The petitioner preferred an application for settlement of the dispute under Chapter V of the Act. Settlement Commissioner placing reliance o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....Jeevan J.Neevalgi, appearing for the Revenue, justifying the impugned orders submitted that at the first instance it was brought to the notice of the assessee while issuing show cause notice dated 20.06.2014 to produce the books of accounts, the same not being maintained as stipulated under the Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 invoices were called for. On the submission of the invoices, the same being not satisfactory, books of accounts not being submitted by the assessee, CENVAT of Rs. 16,43,129/- was rejected. The burden lies on the assessee to prove that goods have actually been received in their factory and used in the manufacture of final products. In the absence of submission of any records for the receipt of inputs procured....