TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (5) TMI 137
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ief are that the proceedings were initiated against the appellant proposing disallowance of Modvat credit availed by him during the period from 1994-95 to 1996-97 and proposing imposition of penalty also. The premises of the appellant were searched on 15-11-96 and records were resumed. Statements were also recorded. It was noticed that M/s. Bansal Iron & Steel Traders had sold iron sheet cutting and iron sheet cutting scrap. The total sale was more than the quantity purchased in comparison to the modvatable scrap purchased from M/s. Maruti Udyog Limited (MUL). It appeared that the modvatable material purchased from MUL was sold as iron sheet cutting and iron sheet cutting scrap. Further it was noticed that the scrap was purchased by M/s. Ba....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the invoices of original scrap manufacturers. Accordingly, a show cause notices were issued to M/s. Haryana Steel Alloys Ltd., M/s. Bansal Iron & Steel Traders and M/s. V.D. Malik & Sons asking them to explain as to why Modvat credit should not be disallowed and why penalty should not be imposed. In reply, M/s. Haryana Steel and Alloys Ltd., the appellants stated that the scrap material supplied by M/s. Bansal Iron & Steel Traders and M/s. V.D. Malik & Sons was in fact from M/s. MUL. Even on the search of premises sufficient stock material was available in their stockyard. It was contended by the appellants that no reliance can be placed on the statements of people when other evidence in the form of material was available in the stock of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ther been decided that the Range Staff should undertake cent percent verification of duty-paying documents in respect of which duty credit exceeds Rs.10,000/-". Learned Counsel submits that in their case each invoice had duty incidence of more than 10,000 rupees. He submits that during the material period no objection was raised by the Range Staff when the duty-paying documents were submitted to them along with RT-12 returns. Learned Counsel also refers to the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of C.C.E., Chandigarh v. M/s. B.T. Steels reported in 2001 (130) E.L.T. 120 (T) = 2000 (41) RLT 836. In para 7 it has been held as under : "7. I have considered the submissions and perused the record. The Final Order under consideration had follo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is of which Modvat credit was taken. He further submits that the appellants were manufacturing steel ingots and they had no facility of re-rolling the products. 6.Learned Counsel further submits that the Department did not bring any evidence on record to show that the scrap available in their stockyard at the time of visit of the Central Excise officers was not the scrap sold by M/s. MUL to the registered dealers who supplied the scrap to the appellants. Learned Counsel, therefore, prays that the appeal may be allowed with consequential benefit. 7.Shri Mewa Singh, learned SDR refers to the statements of the employees of the appellant and submits that the employees have in their statements stated that sometimes the registered dealers were ....