TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 1551
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appellant procured Furnace Oil/Fuel Oil from First Stage Dealer, namely M/s. T. Paul & Sons. The department, on scrutiny of invoices of Furnace Oil issued by the said dealer, noted that latter had procured such goods from three manufacturers. (i) M/s. Concast Ispat Ltd. (ii) M/s. Himadri Chemicals & Industries Ltd. and M/s. Shark Detergent and Cakes Products (P) limited. Since the above three suppliers to T. Paul & Sons were not manufacturers of Furnace Oil, the department came to the conclusion that the appellant had availed Cenvat Credit during the period June 2006 to March 2008 on the basis of M/s. T. Paul & Sons invoices irregularly. The department was of the view that such credits were availed in violation of Rule 3 (1) read with Rule ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and he dropped the proceedings initiated against T. Paul & Sons. The Ld. Advocate submitted that the above order stands accepted by Revenue. As such, on the basis of the findings of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), picture that emerges is that the invoices issued by T. Paul & Sons which form the basis for the assessee to avail such Cenvat Credit, are legal and proper and the Cenvat Credit availed cannot be disallowed. 3. The above arguments were refuted by Shri S. S. Chattopadhyay, Ld. DR. In addition, he also explained the grounds of the appeal filed by Revenue against impugned order. The Ld. DR submitted that the Adjudicating Authority has imposed penalty under Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Act. ....