TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 637
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s Pvt. Ltd. The department carried out an investigation wherein it was revealed that it one particular vehicle no. GJ-01-AE/3854 purportedly used for transportation of goods covered under invoice no. 12/27.4.2007 was not used as per the statement of transporter for transportation of goods from manufacturer, M/s Tribhuvan Industries Pvt. Ltd to M/s Goo Luck Empire. On this basis, the department contended that since the goods were not transported from manufacturer to the first stage dealer. There is no supply of goods from the first stage dealer to the appellant. On this basis, credit in respect of 7 consignment was disallowed and the same was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Therefore, the present appeal by the appellant's company as we....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... available -- -- 3. There are absolutely no discrepancies in 6 consignments out of the above 7 consignments. The only discrepancy found is in respect of consignments as Sr. 6 where it is alleged that the Vehicle No. GJ-1- AU-3854 purportedly used as transport vehicle in respect of the Invoice No. 12/27.4.2007 issued by M/s Tribhuvan was not used as per the recorded statement of the transporter. 4. Based solely on the aforesaid enquiry, involving the said single Invoice No. 12 of M/s Tribhuvan, the department has concluded in the impugned Order that all the 7 consignments including those 3 consignments manufactured by M/s Gyscoal Alloys Ltd., were not received by the Appellant in their factory. 5. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ibhuvan and M/s Gyscoal Alloys Ltd. 7. Therefore, the Department cannot deny the Cenvat Credit on the flimsy and tenuous ground that the Appellant failed to submit the evidence such as toll receipts, weighing slip,etc. In any case, since the Appellants had installed their own weighbridge in their factory, they did not weight the input out the factory. Secondly, the toll receipts are kept by the transporters with them for submitting to the consigner/ consignee who pays the freight to them. Since the Appellant did not made payment of the transporter, the toll receipts were not available with them. 8. The Appellant buying the inputs from the registered dealer cannot be expected to go beyond that and examine as to whether the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eiterates the finding of the impugned order. He submits that the appellant could not produce the copy of the consignment note, toll receipt, etc. Accordingly, could not prove the transportation of the goods to the appellant. Therefore, the impugned order is in order which does not require any interference. 5. I have carefully considered the submission made by both the sides and perused the records. I find that the entire case is based on one statement of transporter, that too in respect of one consignment between the manufacturer M/s Tribhuvan Industries Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Good Luck Empire. As regard statement of the director of the appellant's company, there is no admission regarding wrong availment of credit without receipt of the goods....