Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2017 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 584 - CESTAT CHENNAIMODVAT credit - denial on the ground that invoices issued by unregistered dealer - Held that: - the Hon'ble High Courts of Ahmedabad as well as Punjab and Haryana in the case of COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., DELHI-III, GURGAON Versus MYRON ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED [2006 (11) TMI 213 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH], has held that credit cannot be denied even though the invoices are issued by a dealer from unregistered premises - dis-allowance of credit unjustified. Credit has been denied on the ground that appellants have availed excess credit - Held that: - The excess credit availed would be ₹ 47,144/- only. Instead of disallowing this excess credit of ₹ 47,144, the department has disallowed the entire credit of ₹ 17,684/-. The appellants admittedly having debited the excess credit of ₹ 47,144/-, the disallowance of credit on this ground is unjustified. CENVAT credit - denied on the ground that the parent quantity mentioned in invoices is only 275 kgs., whereas, the quantity supplied to the appellants is 675 kgs - Held that: - the parent invoices was in fact for 850 kgs, and only by mistake the same has been mentioned as 275 kgs - denial of credit unjustified. The disallowance of credit for the reason that the quantity of inputs was received was not entered in Part-1 RG 23A register is also explained by the appellants, which according to us is acceptable and tenable. CENVAT credit denied also on the ground that the appellants have taken only less credit of ₹ 2,375/- against the duty paid to the tune of ₹ 2,500/- - Held that: - The same has been explained by the appellants stating that during the relevant period N/N. 14/90 permitted only 95% credit to be availed, Needless to say that disallowance of credit is unjustified. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|