CEA No.2 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CEA No.2 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION: February 26, 2010 COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE ...APPELLANT VERSUS M/S L.R. ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI ...RESPONDENT GOBINDGARH CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. PRESENT: MR. H.P.S.GHUMAN, SR.STANDING COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT. ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL) The Revenue has impugned the order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Annexure A-4) dated 28.11.2008, out of which the following question of law arises:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Octroi receipts containing details vehicle no., description and quantity of goods issued by the State Revenue Authority authenticating removal of goods but without consignor's name & 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?” This very question is squarely covered by the decision in CEA CEA No.2 of 2010 -2- No.47 of 2009, titled as Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh vs. M/s Swastik Steel Works, decided on 8.7.2009 vide which the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. In view of the above, this appeal is dismissed in the same terms as M/s Swastik Steel Works (supra). (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA) JUDGE February 26, 2010 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) Gulati JUDGE