2018 (9) TMI 742

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on Steels and Alloys (P) Ltd., the appellant assessee against the impugned Order-in-Original No. 03/2008 (CX) (PNR) passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Tirupati dt. 13.03.2008. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the Central Excise Officers visited the factory premises of appellant assessee and found that they had taken fraudulent Modvat credit under RG-23A amounting to Rs. 34,30,782/- on the basis of gate passes without actually receiving the goods. They also found that the appellant had manufactured and clandestinely removed a quantity of 1305.86 MTS of MS Ingots/Runners and Risers evading payment of Central Excise duty of Rs. 13,05,860/-. They also found a shortage of 3 MTS of Ferro Manganese in their fact....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... statements of the persons, who themselves are violators of law, cannot be relied upon. h) Payments were made by the appellant to suppliers through banking channel which were not taken into account. i) The appellants taken Modvat credit on the duty paid documents and the demand is time barred. j) Interest and penalties are not imposable. 3. This is a very old case and is now in the second round of litigation. In the show cause notice 67 documents were relied upon and listed. It is the contention of the appellant that they have not been provided with copies of relied upon documents. These documents are also not available in the appeal book and papers before me. This matter was examined and the Learned Departmental Representative was a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on that there was no need to record the statements of transporters as has been asserted by the appellant because the investigations and the statements from the suppliers themselves have proved, that the goods have not been sent and the only documents were sent by them. As far as clandestine removal is concerned, it is his submission that the available documentary evidence and material facts prove the case. He further asserts that the bonafide purchasers of the goods are entitled to credit of MODVAT. In this case, since the appellants have not received the goods but only the documents, they are not entitled to MODVAT credit. He prayed that the appeal may be dismissed. 5. I have considered the arguments made by both sides and perused the rec....