Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: modi script in Mahavir Ispat Pvt Ltd vs Hyderabad-Iv on 28 November, 2023Matching Fragments
3. In response to summons, Appellant had produced records like balance sheets, electricity bills for the period 2006 - 07 and 2007 - 08 and ledgers maintained in 'modi script'. They had stated that they were not maintaining form-4 register. The Appellant unit is located in a compound belonging to Shri Shiva spinning Mills Private Ltd, a part of which was given to the Appellant and the remaining area were given to few other small-scale units - producing HDPE drums, PP bags, laminate boards etc. There were also some godowns in the said compound. The common incoming power supply was of 33 kVA and one common meter was installed. The Department engaged one, Mr. Ravi Kumar, Engineer of the power distribution company - APCPDCL, who went round the unit and reported that the Appellants were drawing 175 kVA power. Verification of the common electricity bills (received from the Supdt. Engineer, Hyderabad), revealed that Shri Shiva Spinning Mills were drawing power from APCPDCL as well as from some private parties. The details were recorded under panchnama dated 18/07/2008.
24. Opposing the Appeals, learned AR for Revenue relies on the Impugned Order. He further urges that Appellant have not maintained proper records as appeared at the time of inspection. Further, they have maintained accounts in regional language (modi script). Further, they have not maintained Form-IV register (raw materials). Further, gate register shows that they have received bazaar scrap but entry of such bazaar scrap was not found recorded during inspection. Hence it appears that they have received and used clandestinely. Appellant has not satisfactorily explained the consumption of MS angles, bars, channels, etc., with regard to taking of Cenvat credit. As per Rule 22 of Central Excise Rules, every assessee is required to maintain proper records of production and produce the same on inspection. Further, Appellant have not E/363 & 364/2011 maintained heat register. At the time of visit, locally procured scrap was found available but no records were maintained for purchase of such scrap.