Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (3) TMI 1136 - CESTAT NEW DELHIDenial of CENVAT credit - credit taken on the basis of photocopy of the invoice - Held that: - It is an admitted fact that the cenvat credit has been taken by the appellant based on the photocopy of invoice issued by the supplier of goods and that photocopy of invoice is not prescribed as a valid document under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules 2002. However, upon verification of the books of accounts maintained by the appellant, since the original authority has held that the goods covered under the disputed invoice has suffered duty and the goods have been received in the factory for use in or in relation to manufacture of the final product, the requirement of Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004, in my opinion, has been complied with for the purpose of cenvat benefit. Since the duty paid character is not under dispute, it cannot be said that taking of cenvat credit on the basis of photocopy of the invoice is attributable to fraud, collusion, suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of duty. Thus, SCN in this case should be confined to a period of one year from the relevant date. Since, cenvat credit in the present case has been taken in the month of April 2006 and the SCN was issued on 19.02.2009, I am of the view that the same is barred by limitation of time. Since the SCN has been issued beyond the period of one year, I am of the opinion that proceedings initiated for recovery of cenvat demand and for imposition of penalty is not proper, and accordingly, I hold that the impugned order is not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee.
|