TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 129
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Excise Intelligence issued the Show cause notice to the appellant on 10.04.2008 alleging evasion of duty on availment of Cenvat Credit on the ground that the inputs were neither actually received in the factory nor were used in the manufacture of final product. It was alleged that inputs were never received in the plant but got diverted to be sold at Jaipur, still the inputs credit to the tune of Rs. 40,96,119/- for the period from March, 2005 to October, 2006 was availed by the appellant. The same was proposed to be disallowed and to be recovered vide the impugned Show Cause Notice. The said proposal was confirmed vide the Order-in-Original No. 46/2009 dated 29.09.2009 with the order of imposition of penalty upon the appellant as well as u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isite documents with the Adjudicating Authority repeatedly at the time of filing their appeal to the impugned Show Cause Notice. The copy thereof has also been mentioned to have been annexed with the written submissions as have been filed today. Learned Counsel has laid emphasis on the entries in the books of accounts in terms of form RG 23 A Part II register, in terms of form IV A register, having all the requisite details with respect to 35 invoices of the year 2005-2006. It is mentioned that the demand of Rs. 61,672/- and for the period 2004-2005 Rs. 2,82,805/-, and Rs. 8,26,260/- ( Rs. 11,07,737/-) for the year 2006-07, as final order has confirmed has not been disputed by the appellant. However, it is submitted that the rest of the dem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the Adjudicating Authority below has rightly confirmed the demand as was proposed vide the impugned show cause notice. However, on being query raised by the Bench about the specific contention of RG 23 A part I register which has repeatedly been tendered by the parties to the authorities below and have also been tendered along with the written synopsis to the Bench, Learned Departmental Representative has raised no objection in remanding the matter seeking the said clarity. 6. After hearing both the parties and perusing the entire record, I observe and hold as follows: The Adjudicating Authority below have duly acknowledged the synopsis being submitted by the appellant at the time of personal hearing. It has duly been acknowledge....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o production section, issued to job workers issued to such clearance and closing balance. Specific invoices are already mentioned in the given columns of these registers. It is otherwise apparent from the copies of the documents as annexed along with the written synopsis. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that the finding of the Adjudicating Authority in para 6.16 of the Order in Original which reads as follows are wrong: 6.16. In view of the above factual position, the plea of the appellant assessee made before the Hon'ble CESTAT that the authorities below had only considered 9 and 13 consignment during 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 respectively, without giving any cogent reasons, is found to be factually incorrect as still it could not ....