Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.22 seconds)
Metal Alloys Industries vs Commissioner, Central Excise & ... on 18 July, 2023 cites

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Som Datt Builders And Karan ... on 10 April, 2018

"6.4 I find that the facts of the case clearly show that the appellant was indulged in passing cenvat credit fraudulently through fake invoices, without manufacturing the goods and only managed records and invoices of raw materials just to corroborate the manufacture, which has not been actually carried out. I find that in absence of any manufacturing activity, storage of the lead ingots, that too without any document, was with intent to camouflage the activity being carried out in contravention of the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the Rules made thereunder. I, therefore, hold that the goods seized from the premises of the appellant are liable for confiscation. I further hold that as the goods have been held liable for confiscation, penalty equal to the amount of duty is imposable under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 read with Section 11 AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Further, considering the nature of activity, the appellant has been found indulged in. I find the amount of redemption fine is justified. My views find support from the judgement of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of Magnum Steels Ltd. Vs. Union of India - 2019 (367) ELT 725 (M.P.), wherein observed as under:-
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

Cce, Kanpur vs M/S. Trela Footwear Exports (P) Ltd on 2 May, 2013

), (iii) Zincollied (India) Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Vapi, (iv) Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. S. Channi Steel Pvt. Ltd. and (v) Commissioner of Central Excise, Kanpur Vs. Trela Footwear Exports (P) Ltd. - 2013 (295) ELT 316 (Tribunal-Delhi). On perusal of these judgments I find that in those cases there was no other evidence available on record to corroborate the charges and there were concurrent findings in favour of the assessee.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 1 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Meghmala & Ors vs G.Narasimha Reddy & Ors on 16 August, 2010

13. The glaring facts of the present case are that in a factory premises where neither electricity is used nor there is any facility to manufacture the goods i.e., copper wire rods and copper ingots, yet the appellant is claiming 9 to have manufactured lead ingots. The installation of the two furnaces, which are not in use and similarly the D.G. set is only to give a deceptive picture of manufacturing activity. It is nothing but a camouflage with fraudulent intention to avail the Cenvat credit without accounting for the goods. The act of the assessee and the modus operandi adopted was with intent to avail undue benefit which is nothing but playing fraud on the department. It is a settled principle of law that fraud vitiates all solemn acts. Relying on the observations of the Apex Court in the case of Meghmala & Ors. Vs. G. Navasimha Reddy & Ors. - 2010 (8) SCC 383 that dishonesty cannot be permitted to bear the fruit and benefit to the person who played fraud and in such circumstances I am not inclined to accept the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant. The learned counsel during the course of arguments have referred that the entries were made in the computer and have now placed on record certain documents.
Supreme Court of India Cites 47 - Cited by 311 - B S Chauhan - Full Document
1   2 Next