M/s. Sri Ulaganayaki Amman Steels, M/s. Sri Amman Allied and Steel Industries Versus Commissioner of GST, Central Excise, Trichy
Central Excise
2018 (3) TMI 261 – CESTAT CHENNAI – TMI
CESTAT CHENNAI – AT
Dated:- 26-2-2018
Appeal No. E/324 & 325/2009 – Final Order Nos. 40530-40531 / 2018
Central Excise
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical)
Shri S. Jaikumar, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri S. Govindarajan, AC (AR) for the Respondent
ORDER
Per Bench
Brief facts are that the appellant M/s. Sri Ulaganayaki Amman Steels are engaged in the manufacture of MS ingots and are registered with the Department. Based on intelligence, the officers of anti-evasion conducted simultaneous search at the factory premises of the appellant as well as M/s. Sri Amman Allied and Steel Industries (appellants in Appeal No.E/325/2009) and various other premises. As a result of investigation, show cause notice was issued alleging that a
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
nd of Rs. 6,48,392/- for recovery of CENVAT credit which was raised against M/s. Sri Ulaganayaki Amman Steels. Penalty of Rs. One lakh was also imposed on M/s. Sri Amman Allied and Steel Industries under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2000. Aggrieved, the appellants have field Appeal Nos. E/324 & 325/2009.
2. At the time of hearing, ld. counsel Shri S. Jaikumar appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that the appellants are not contesting the above appeals and he filed written statement of appellant to this effect. He submitted that against the Tribunals Final Order No. 529 & 530/2008 dated 30.4.2008, they had filed Civil Miscellaneous appeal No. 2299/2009 before the Honble High Court of Madras and that the appellant undertakes to withdraw the said appeal on or before 31.3.2018. The only plea put forward by the ld. counsel is that the adjudicating authority may be directed to verify whether the appellant is eligible for CENVAT credit so as to adjust the duty demand that has
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
dismissed. The only plea put forward by the ld. counsel is that the adjudicating authority may be directed to verify the CENVAT documents and may be given benefit of the CENVAT credit in case the appellant produce documents. We find that this plea is a reasonable one. In Vikash J. Shah Vs. Commissioner (Appeals) Coimbatore 2016 (334) ELT 491 (Mad.), the Honble High Court observed that the benefit of CENVAT credit ought to be given to the appellant. We direct the adjudicating authority to consider the claim of the appellant for CENVAT credit on production of documents. The said verification shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. The appellant shall not be given any further time for production of documents and in case the appellant has not produced the documents within such period of three months, the matter remains closed.
6. The ld. counsel has pleaded to waive the penalty imposed on M/s. Sri Amman Allied and Steel Industries. A pen
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =