Judgment M.M.Kumar, J. 1. This appeal filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for brevity the Act) is directed against order dated 29-5-2008 [2008 (229) E.L.T. 607 (Tri. - Del.)] passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for brevity the Tribunal). The Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding that the dealer- respondent had produced a copy of invoice showing truck number and also produced G/R issued by the transport company showing the same truck number. Octroi receipts were also produced which bear the same truck number. Even weighment slips were also of the same truck number. On the basis of the aforesaid material the Tribunal has taken the view that the dealer-respondent cannot be considered to have not received the inputs from the registered dealers under the cover of invoice showing payment of duty. On that basis the Tribunal held that credit could not be denied to the dealer-respondent on the ground that registered dealer had not received the material. Accordingly it has been held by the Tribunal that the credit is available to the respondent. 2. Having heard learned counsel at a considerable length we find that the findings recorded by the Tribunal does not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting interference of this Court. Once the Tribunal has taken the particular view on the basis of evidence then any other view, even if possible, cannot be preferred. The High Court under Section 35G of the Act does not sit as a court of appeal to re-appreciate the evidence and record a new finding of fact. There is thus no merit in the appeal which may warrant admission of the appeal as no question of law much less a substantive question of law would arise for determination. The appeal is wholly misconceived and the same is accordingly dismissed.