Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2016 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (11) TMI 400 - CESTAT MUMBAIDiscrepancy in the inventory of input on which Cenvat credit being taken - Held that:- It cannot be ruled out that in a big industry, there is always possibility of minor variations in the stock, which occurred due to human error. Moreover, in the present case neither there is any charge nor any evidence to show that differences in input inventory is either due to short receipt or cleared from factory clandestinely. In such a situation, even if there is shortage of input, the same must be lying in the factory. On the identical issue in the appellant’s own case cited by the Ld. Counsel, this Tribunal has decided the issue relying on the decision of Maruti Udyog Ltd [2004 (6) TMI 155 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI ] which was upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court reported as [2015 (8) TMI 493 - SUPREME COURT ] that Cenvat credit cannot be disallowed in the facts and circumstances of the present case. - Decided in favour of assessee
|