CEA No.47 of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
CEA No. 47 of 2009
Date of decision 8.7.2009
Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh ... Appellant
Versus
M/s Swastik Steel Works ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present: Mr. Kamal Sehgal,Advocate for the appellant
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement ?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ?
M.M.KUMAR, J.
This order shall dispose of bunch of eight appeals* as all the
appeals are directed against the common order dated 3.6.2008 passed by the
Custom Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for brevity
‘the Tribunal’). The Tribunal has placed reliance on the findings recorded by
the Commissioner ( Appeals) and has upheld the order dated 28.4.2006
holding that no reliance could be placed on the octroi receipts which do not
contain any iota of evidence that the material mentioned therein had been
cleared/ sold by M/s Surbhi Gas Service, Mandi Gobindgarh. The receipts
only depict the description of the goods and vehicle number but do not
establish by any evidence that these octroi receipts relate to M/s Surbhi Gas
Service as it did not contain any reference to their name or their bill
number. It has further been held that no enquiry was made by the Revenue
from the Octroi Post Authorities as to how and on what basis octroi receipts
were issued and therefore the charges against the dealer- assessee remained
unsubstantiated. However, the Revenue has claimed that following
CEA No.47 of 2009 2
substantive question of law would arise for determination of this Court:
” Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the
Tribunal was right in holding that the octroi receipts issued by
the State Revenue Authority authenticating removal of goods,
without consignor’s name and address and his bill No., do not
constitute sufficient evidence for holding that the goods
covered under the octroi receipts were not received by the
parties enabling them to take Cenvat credit fraudulently ?”
Having heard learned counsel we are of the considered view that the
findings of fact recorded by the Commissioner ( Appeals) and upheld by the
Tribunal do not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting interference of
this Court. We are further of the view that no question of law much less a
substantive question of law would arise for determination of this Court.
These are pure findings of fact. There is no connecting evidence on record
to show that the octroi receipts could be connected to M/s Surbhi Gas
Service as these octroi receipts do not contain any reference to their name or
bill numbers. There is thus no merit in these appeals and the same are
dismissed.
A copy of this order be placed on the file of connected appeals.
(M.M.Kumar)
Judge
(Jaswant Singh)
8.7.2009 Judge
okg
*
1. CEA No. 47 of 2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh
v. M/sSwastik Steel Works
2CEA No. 48 of 2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh
v. M/s Karam Steel corporation
3CEA No. 49 of 2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh
v. M/s Modi Oil and General Mills.
4. CEA No. 50 of 2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh
v. M/s Modi Wire Products
CEA No.47 of 2009 3
5.No. 51 of 2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh
v. M/s Arihant Steel Rolling Mills.
6. CEA No. 52 of 2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh
v. M/s Prem Steel and Allied Industries
7CEA No. 53 of 2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh
v. M/sSurbhi Gas Service
8.CEA No. 54 of 2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh
v. Yogya Dutt