Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 314 - AT - Central ExciseRebate claim - CENVAT Credit of excise duty/CVD paid on such inputs and were utilising the same for payment of duty on finished goods cleared to respective principal manufacturers - Cenvat registers of the appellant were called for scrutiny while their application for sanction of rebate claim was being examined - credit has been availed on the documents of SIL/SCPPL - HELD THAT:- It has been pointed out by the appellant that each page of register also contains ECC Code of appellant. Appellant have explained that two separate registers maintained by them in respect of inputs received from two different clients and thus there is no error in mentioning the names of their clients in the Cenvat registers. There is no prescribed format for making such registers and there is no law which debars the appellants from maintaining separate registers for two different clients. In these circumstances the allegation in the notice and in the impugned order that the Cenvat credit taken and utilized from the said two registers does not belong to the appellant is misplaced - if the Revenue believed that the said registers did not belong to the appellant and in fact belonged to SIL and SCPPL, then the same could have been essentially verified from the other financial record of the appellant. There is no scrutiny of other financial records done and therefore, the allegation remains unsubstantiated - demand on this count is set-aside. No investigation or verification of records has been done to ascertain if the goods were received in the factory and utilized for the purpose of manufacture of final product or not. The only requirement under the law to avail credit of duty paid on inputs is that the said goods should have suffered duty liability and should have been used in the production of finished goods which are liable to duty - In the instant case, no investigation whatever has been done to ascertain that the goods were received and utilized in the manufacture of goods. Whatever be the address in the invoice documents on the strength of which the credit has been availed, the credit cannot be denied if the goods are in fact received in the factory and utilized for the manufacture of finished goods. The demand set aside and the matter remanded to original adjudicating authority. The appellant may produce all the necessary record of receipt and use of goods in the manufacture, in terms of Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - The matter may be decided after examining the evidence. Denial of credit also on the ground that inputs on which credit is availed are not owned by the appellant - HELD THAT:- There is no such requirement in the law that only inputs which are owned by the assessee, the credit in relation to such inputs which are owned by the assessee can be availed. The only requirement is that the credit of inputs used in relation of manufacture of finished goods can be availed. Availment of CENVAT Credit in excess - HELD THAT:- While the SCN cites Rule 3(7) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, it does not disclose exact manner as to how this calculation has been made and the impugned has also not dealt with the issue. Thus, the order of the Commissioner is not a speaking order consequently, this demand is also set-aside. The Commissioner is directed to disclose the exact manner the demand has been calculated and the details of formula applicable to the facts of the case. Penalty on SIL, SCPPL and Shri R.L. Shetty, (employee of SIL) - penalty imposed alleging that they have aided and abetted M/s. Agro Pack Limited to projected themselves as manufacturer at Ankleshwar and took credit in the Cenvat account registers and allowed the same to be utilized illegally by M/s. Agro Pack Limited. - HELD THAT:- The said allegation has not been upheld in the order passed and consequently, penalty on SIL and SCPPL and Shri R.L. Shetty is set-aside - As regards penalties on Shri Tushar Patel, Shri Bipin Patel and Shri Harish M. Patel, employees of M/s. Agro Pack Limited, the matter is remanded for determination of penalty, after examining the facts in respect of wrong availment of credit, if any. Appeal allowed in part.
|