Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful)

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2018 (7) TMI 412

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ponents Like Bogies, Couplers, classifiable under Chapter 86 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. During investigation, it was found that (i) M/s Indo Thai Flexible Tubes Ltd. during November 2008, issued CENVAT invoices to the assessee. It was found that the vehicle No. as mentioned in the invoices are non-existent vehicles. A show Cause Notice dated 20.11.2013 was issued to the assessee, Shri Samir Kumar Gupta, Director of the assessee, M/s Indo Thai Flexible Tubes Ltd. and Shri Krishna Chandra Bajaj, Broker of Iron & Steel, proposing demand of Central Excise duty and imposition of penalties. By the impugned order the Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand of Central Excise duty of Rs. 12,56,789/- alongwith interest and imposed penalt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dent No. 1. It is also observed that the Respondent No. 2 stated in his written submission before the Adjudicating Authority that he is retracting his statements recorded before the investigating officers. Hence, the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the penalties on the Respondents as there is no material available of the act of abetting on the part of the Respondents. 5. Revenue in their grounds of appeal stated as under:- "(i) That the Commissioner (Appeal-II) failed to consider that Sri Krishna Bajaj had admitted and confirmed that only invoces were issued but no material was transacted in his deposition before the Central Excise Officers on different dates i.e. on 08.08.13, 13.08.13, 14.08.13 & 16.08.13. Shri Bajaj had not retract....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r Rule 26 (2) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. That Appellate authority failed to take notice to the fact that Sri Samir Kumar Gupta, Director of M/s Jupiter Alloy and Steel (I) Ltd., had executed and perpetuated this fraud undertaking paper transaction with Sri Krishan Chandra bajaj, Broker of Iron and Steel and M/s Indo Thai Flexible Tubes Ltd. (Unit-II) and deliberate the mis-availment of Cenvat Credit by way of manipulation of their statuary records to fabricate such purchase of inputs and consequent availment of Cenvat Credit on the strength of such Excise Invoices issued by the aforesaid M/s Indo Thai Flexible Tubes Ltd. (Unit-II) and the Commissioner (Appeal) had wrongly waived the penalty imposed on Sri Samir Kumar Gupta." 6. T....