TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 943X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hand - credit disallowed - appeal dismissed - decided against assessee. - E/1947/10 - A/86779/17/SMB - Dated:- 11-4-2017 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, Advocate, for appellant Shri Ashutosh Nath, Asst. Commr (AR), for respondent ORDER Per: M.V. Ravindran This appeal is directed against order-in-appeal No.SB(114)114/Th-I/2010 dated 11.0.2010. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration is regarding the eligibility to avail CENVAT credit on the finished goods returned back from the market or otherwise. Appellant received back their finished goods from C F Agents availed CENVAT credit based upon the triplicate copy of their own invoices issued under Rule 11 of the Central E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shed products on payment of appropriate duty. He would submit that CENVAT credit avail on triplicate copy is correct in law as per the decision of the Tribunal in the case of BAPL Industries Ltd. v. CCE Coimbatore - 2006-(XCI)-GJX-0002-CESTAT and produces copy of the same. 4. Learned D.R. on the other hand reiterates the findings of the lower authorities. He would also rely upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Akzo Nobel Coatings India Pvt. Ltd. - 2017-TIOL-83-CESTAT-Bang wherein identical issue was decided holding that CENVAT credit is not eligible on the quantity of the goods which cannot be co-related or established with the goods are received by appellant or otherwise. He also relied upon the judgement of the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant were accompanied by the original, duplicate copies of the Central excise invoices issued under Rule 11 by the appellant. In case, the impugned goods returned back to the appellant due to defects/for repairs / reconditioning of goods for repairs / reconditioning / remaking under Rule 16, the goods should have been accompanied by the invoices/documents which was issued at the time of original dispatch of the impugned excisable goods i.e. original and duplicate invoices by the appellant along with the goods. Further more, the appellant has not placed any reliance on the procedures nor followed as laid down in the Notification issued under Rule 6 , wherein, it has been specifically mentioned that, the goods which are returned ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, which proves the wrong attitude of the appellant towards the various settled rules/notifications/circulars as framed by the Board, by not following the same, therefore, the claim of the appellant, is not sustainable. 6.1 The above said factual findings has not been contraverted by appellant in the appeal before the Tribunal. It is also factually correct that the triplicate copy is a document on which CENVAT credit was availed by the appellant. I also find that the appellant is not able to correlate actual quantity despatched and received back by them from C F agent based upon the documents available. I find that the decision relied upon by learned Counsel in the case of BAPL Industries Ltd. (supra) will also not carry the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
