Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (1) TMI 383 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (1) TMI 383 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - 2016 (335) E.L.T. 559 (Tri. - Del.) - Denial of CENVAT Credit - air conditioners installed in office of the factory - whether the credit is admissible on re-constructed copies of bill of entry - Held that:- Appellant had originals of the documents in dispute. They lost the documents and FIR has also been lodged for the same. During the time of audit, the appellants could not place the original documents before the officers. But, however, they placed the phot .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ments. The genuineness of the documents having been established the denial of credit is unjustified - The receipt of inputs in the factory and duty paid upon them is not disputed. The Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 do not provide any time limit for availing credit on inputs or capital goods. - In Board's Circular No.943/4/2011-CX dated 29.04.2011, it is mentioned that "goods such as furniture and stationery used in an office within the factory are goods used in the factory and are used in relati .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

DR ORDER Per Sulekha Beevi CS The issue to be considered in the above appeals is whether the credit is admissible on re-constructed copies of bill of entry. Since both the appeals deal with the very same issue, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The facts, in brief, are as under:- The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of pneumatic tyres and are availing cenvat credit on inputs, capital goods and input services. During the period 1.4.2004 to 31.12 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

77; 27,33,393/- on the ground that the bills of entries are not originals and also alleging that few bills of entries were more than one year old, (b) the credit amount of ₹ 1,03,336/- was proposed to be denied for the reason that the duty paying documents were more than one year old, (c) the credit amount of ₹ 16,12,486/- was proposed to be denied for reason that the inputs were stored in godwon outside the factory and (d) the credit of ₹ 8,120/- was proposed to be denied for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

her reliefs sought were rejected. Against the said order, the appellant approached the Tribunal. The present appeal no.E/l789/2006 is the appeal filed against the said order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 17.02.2006. 3. It has to be mentioned that the entire amount of credit of ₹ 28,44,849/-(Rs.27,33,393/- + 103336/- + ₹ 8,120/-) had been debited by the appellants vide entry made by them as on 31.01.2005 itself. 4. During the pendency of the appeal no.E/1789/2006, the appellants .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

entry. After adjudication, the disallowance of credit was confirmed by the order-in-original dated 16.01.2009. The appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the demand, interest and penalty. The said order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 31.03.2010 is impugned in appeal no.E/1519/2007. 5. At the outset, it has to be made clear that the credit was disallowed in the first instance on the ground that the bills of entry were not originals but only photocopies. The appel .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ficer and the Commissioner (Appeals), in the second instance of adjudication, the officers had occasion to peruse and verify the reconstructed copies of the bills of entry. The appellant has filed misc. application no.E/Misc/311/2009, which is a petition to receive the copies of remaining reconstructed bills of entry in Appeal No.E/1789/2006 as additional evidence. This application was considered along with the final hearing of these appeals. 6. The credit has been disallowed on three grounds (1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ellants could not place the original documents before the officers. But, however, they placed the photocopies. The credit was denied for the reason that bills of entry are photocopies. Later, they obtained reconstructed copies of these documents. Credit availed on reconstructed copies was also denied. It is seen from the documents that these reconstructed bills of entry have been attested as true copies by the officers of customs. By such authentication and attestation by the concerned officers .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is contention of the Revenue deserves to be brushed aside. 8. Ld, DR strenuously argued that the adjudicating officer in appeal no.E/1789/2006 had no occasion to peruse the reconstructed documents and, therefore, a chance has to be given for verification of these documents . In our opinion, it would be a futile exercise to send back this appeal for verification. Both the appeals pertain to the availment of credit on very same duty paid documents. In the second instance, the Authorities below had .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version