TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t there is no suppression of facts by Pune unit - Cenvat credit cannot be denied to the appellant on amortized cost of capital goods in case of Pune as well as Jalgaon units. With regard to supplementary invoices issued by Jalgaon unit and the charge of under valuation, the Settlement Commission has not given any finding that there was suppression on the part of Jalgaon Unit and no penalty was imposed, in that circumstances, it can be presumed that charges of suppression is not proved. Therefore, in the absence of any suppression on the part of Jalgaon unit, Cenvat credit cannot be denied. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. E/855/2008-DB - Final Order No. 60650 / 2017 - Dated:- 5-4-2017 - Mr. Ashok Jindal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i) MUL imported machines under EPCG scheme in 1994-95 (ii) Upto Feb 2000, the machines were used by Jalgaon and Pune units under a tripartite arrangements with MUL and thereafter purchased by appellant i.e. Gurgaon Unit. (iii) As the MUL did not fulfil the export obligation, it paid CVD along with interest in Nov, 2001, along with issue of supplementary invoices to Jalgaon and Pune Units of the appellant, passing the burden of additional CVD paid by MUL. (iv) On 26.02.2003, DGCEI visited the Jalgaon unit and asserted that duty paid by MUL should be amortized in the value of goods cleared to Gurgaon unit as it is an additional consideration flowing from MUL. It was pointed out that expenses on account of depreciation, packing, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 23.03.2007 on the ground that supplementary invoices do not satisfy the condition under Rule 7(1)(b) /Rule 9(1)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules. Show cause notice was adjudicated and the impugned order was passed by Commissioner. The appellant filed appeal before this Tribunal and while passing the stay order, this Tribunal referred the issue to Larger Bench which has been decided in favour of the appellant. 3. The ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the Cenvat credit pertaining to supplementary invoices of Jalgaon unit is available, as Larger Bench of this Tribunal has held that, if application is filed before the Settlement Commission under section 32E of the Act for waiver of interest, penalty and immunity from prosecution and su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Larger Bench of this Tribunal as well as the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Pune of the appellant. As in the case of amortized cost of capital goods, this Tribunal has held that the amortized cost is not required to be added in the value of the goods, in that circumstances, supplementary invoices is not required as the same has been issued and credit has been taken and that there is no suppression of facts by Pune unit. In that circumstances, Cenvat credit cannot be denied to the appellant on amortized cost of capital goods in case of Pune as well as Jalgaon units. 6. With regard to supplementary invoices issued by Jalgaon unit and the charge of under valuation, we find that Settlement Commission has not given any findin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
