Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (7) TMI 1140 - AT - Central ExciseDetermination of roper documents for the purpose of Cenvat credit - duty demand - Held that - There is no dispute about the duty paid character of the inputs, their receipt by the present respondent and utilization of the inputs. The technical objection raised by the Revenue seems to be only one that Bill of entry was endorsed by the importer in favour of the assessee by the principal manufacturer and such endorsement cannot be accepted. No reference stand made to any of the provisions of law to bar availment of cenvat credit on the basis of endorsed Bill of Entry. It was not the case of the Revenue that part of the goods said deviated to present respondent. The admitted fact is that goods on record are entire imported goods and were in original packing which stand diverted to the respondent along with the signature of Customs officer. It is also seen that the demand was raised against the respondent based upon the objection by the Audit, which objection was very strongly opposed by the Revenue itself. If that be so, we really fail to understand as to how the Revenue would be aggrieved with the present order of the Commissioner dropping the demand.
Issues:
- Availing cenvat credit based on endorsed Bills of Entries. - Interpretation of Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. - Dispute regarding the validity of endorsed Bills of Entries for availing credit. - Application of precedent decisions in similar cases. - Relevance of Customs endorsements on Bill of Entries for cenvat credit. Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI dealt with the issue of availing cenvat credit based on endorsed Bills of Entries. The case involved the respondents availing duty paid on inputs received from another company, who had imported the goods and endorsed the Bills of Entries in the name of the present assessee. The Revenue objected to the use of endorsed Bills of Entries for cenvat credit, leading to demands being raised against the respondents. However, the Commissioner dropped the demands, which led to the appeals by the Revenue. Upon examining Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, the adjudicating authority noted that the assessee was a job worker and received inputs from the principal company with endorsed Bills of Entries. The authority emphasized that the Bill of Entry is a proper document for availing credit, regardless of whether it is in the name of the ultimate user of the goods. Citing various precedent decisions, the demand was dropped based on the validity of the endorsed Bills of Entries for availing cenvat credit. The judgment highlighted the objection raised by the Audit regarding the endorsement on Bills of Entries, which was strongly contested by the Revenue itself. The Tribunal emphasized that as long as the goods were received and utilized without dispute, and duty was paid on the final products, the credit could not be denied based on minor deficiencies in the documentation. The Tribunal also referenced relevant Board Circulars supporting the acceptance of endorsed Bills of Entries for availing credit, further strengthening the decision to drop the demands. Ultimately, the Tribunal found no justifiable reason to interfere with the Commissioner's order dropping the demands, as there was no legal basis presented by the Revenue to bar the availing of cenvat credit based on endorsed Bills of Entries. The appeals by the Revenue were rejected, affirming the decision in favor of the respondents.
|