Decided on February 20,2015

Shivkumar Kaluram Heda Appellant
C.C.E. And S.T., Vadodara -I Respondents


P.K.DAS - (1.)A common issue is involved in these appeals and therefore, all are taken up together for disposal.
(2.)The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that M/s. Vipul Copper Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Atlanta Electricals Pvt. Ltd., the appellants, are engaged in the manufacture of Copper Rods/Wires, Power Distribution Transformers respectively. The Central Excise officers during the investigation found that both the appellant companies availed Cenvat credit on the basis of Central Excise invoices without receiving the material. Show cause notices were issued, proposing denial of CENVAT credit to both the companies along with interest and the penalty and also imposed penalties on the registered dealers and transporters and the Directors of the appellant companies. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of duty along with interest and imposed penalties against the appellant Commissioners, their Directors, registered dealers. By Order -in -Appeal No. 82 to 88/288/2009(AHD -II)/CE/ID/Commr(A)/Ahd, dated 27 -2 -2009, the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeals filed by the appellants against which Appeal Nos. E/694 -696/2009, E/923 -924/2009 and E/786 -787/2009 were filed by the appellants. By Order -in -Appeal No. Commr(A) 304 -308/VDR -I/2010, dated 20 -10 -2010, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the adjudication order, against the demand of duty and penalties in respect of M/s. Atlanta Electricals Pvt. Ltd. and its Director Shri Harshadbhai A. Mehta and set aside the penalties against the other co -notices. The assessee company and its Directors filed Appeal Nos. E/190 -191/2011. Revenue also filed appeal No. E/110/2011 against the assessee M/s. Atlanta Electricals Pvt. Ltd.
Shri S.J. Vyas, ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of M/s. Vipul Copper Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Nathubhai, Director of the Company submits that the impugned order was passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice. He submits that the entire case was made out on the basis of statements of various persons and records of the transporters. It has been alleged that the appellants had availed Cenvat credit without receiving the goods which is contrary to the evidences as they placed before the lower authorities such as, receipt of the materials, payments by cheques, etc. He seriously challenged the impugned order on the ground that both the authorities below failed to provide the relied upon documents to the appellant. In this context, the ld. Advocate drew the attention of the Bench to the relevant portion of the adjudication order and the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). He further submits that on the basis of the same investigation, against other manufacturers of the Tribunal allowed the appeal in the case of Monarch Metals P. Ltd. v. CCE, Ahmedabad -, 2010 (261) E.L.T. 508 (Tri -Ahmd.). In that case, Revenue filed appeal against one of the assessees before Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, which was dismissed, in the case of Commissioner v. Dhanlaxmi Tubes & Metal Industries - : 2014 (34) S.T.R. 155 (Guj.) : 2012 (282) E.L.T. 206 (Guj.).

(3.)SHRI P.V. Seth, ld. Advocate appearing in Appeal Nos. E/694 -695/2009 (registered dealers) and Appeal Nos. 923 -924/2009 (Transporters) adopts the submissions and arguments of Shri S.J. Vyas, Advocate. Nobody appeared on behalf of Shri Paramjitsingh Thakkar (Transporter).

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.