TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 1533
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l, Galvanized Wire, Stay Wire etc. falling under Chapter 72 of Central Excise Tariff Act 1985 (CEA). During an investigation conducted by the Officers of DGCEI Headquarters, New Delhi against Shri Amit Gupta, Director of M/s. Progressive Alloys India Pvt. Ltd. and other associate dealers, it was revealed that they were passing on the inadmissible Cenvat Credit on the Cenvatable invoices of non-ferrous materials to the manufacturers without delivery of the goods. It was further revealed that 2 firms namely, M/s. Unnathi Alloys Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Moral Alloys Pvt. Ltd. Both being operated by Shri Amit Gupta had issued cenvatable invoices of Zinc Ingots to M/s. Kumar Metals & Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur, who in turn issued Cenvatable invoices to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... every case has to be decided on the basis of its own facts. In the present case, there is the ample evidence on record about appellant availing the alleged amount of Cenvat Credit on the strength of un-genuine invoices during the impugned period. Since the said conduct reflects the contravention of the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 (CCR), the order under challenge has no infirmity. The appeals are accordingly, prayed to be dismissed. 7. After hearing the same and perusing the record, I observe that the show cause notice has been issued to the appellant as a follow-up action during the investigation conducted against the trading firms associated with Shri Amit Gupta, Director of M/s. Progressive Alloys India Pvt. Ltd. No doubt, D....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....GRs were also the parts of the record. The opinion of the adjudicating authority that the established practice for local transportation of goods has no builty/GRs is also a finding merely based on presumption. There is no statutory basis for the said finding specifically in the case, where GR as a document is produced on record. The Department has failed to produce any other document to falsify the said GR. No doubt, the Department is not supposed to establish a fact with mathematical presumption as has been impressed upon by the adjudicating authority below but simultaneously the onus to falsify the document of the appellant still rests upon the Department and the adjudication cannot be decided merely based on the presumptions. 9. It is a....