TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 1209
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndry to get the prime material. During the disputed period, the appellant had purchased the goods from M/s Loha Ispat Ltd, Raigad, who is the first stage dealer. On the basis of the invoices issued by the said first stage dealer, the appellant had availed CENVAT credit of central excise duty indicated therein. Taking of CENVAT credit by the appellant was disputed by the Department on the ground that the goods, in respect of which the first stage dealer had issued the invoices, were not actually received by the appellant for use in the intended purpose of manufacture of the final product. On the basis of such understanding, show cause proceedings were initiated against the appellant, which culminated into the adjudication order dated 24.03.2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-vis those accounted for in the books of accounts maintained of the appellant, he submitted that there is no mis-match with regard to the description of the goods as well as the quantity inasmuch as the dealer had issued invoices based on the manufacturer's invoice issued by JSW Steel Ltd. However, since those goods supplied by the first stage dealer were put in the melting furnace for use as scrap item in the appellants' factory, it has only mentioned 'MS scrap' and there is no mis-match of quantity. As regards, admission of the employees of the appellant with regard to receipt of scrap, he has stated that those statements were recorded under threat/coercion and he has referred to relevant paragraphs in the statements recorded from both Sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....I find that M/s Loha Isptat Ltd. had supplied the goods to the appellant as per the purchase order issued by them. The goods were also transported from such dealer's premises to the appellants' factory under proper transport documents, a sample copy of which is placed at page 93 of the appeal paper-book. On the basis of the invoices received along with the goods in the factory, the appellant had entered the particulars in the GRN maintained by them. The GRN has described the product as MS scrap. Whatever material the appellant had purchased from the first stage dealer, were used as scrap for melting purpose in their foundry located inside the factory. I find that based on the documents maintained by the appellant, the original authority had....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... GRN prepared by the assessee for receipt of the said goods, I find that all the particulars such as Invoice No & date, PO No. & Date, Quantity of goods and Transport Vehicle number mentioned therein are one and the same. Only variation is in the description of the goods i.e. suppliers documents shows description as 'CRCA Coil/ CR CTL that the receivers i.e. assessee's documents show it as "MS Scrap"." 6. However, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) negated the views expressed by the original authority, solely based on the statements recorded from the officers of the appellant company. On a careful reading of the statements recorded from the two executives of the appellant, I find that the question asked by the Department and the ....