Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (8) TMI 673

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... VAT Credit Register at the adjudication stage which corresponds to the ER- 1 return and therefore, the Credit figures disclosed in the said ER-1 return have to be accepted as sacrosanct without any demur. There is no reason to saddle the assessee with the demand of CENVAT Credit, as has been rightly held by the Ld. Commissioner in the impugned order by setting aside the duty demand. Whether the matter should be remanded back to the original authority? - HELD THAT:- Since the Ld. Commissioner is satisfied on both the counts (i) that there was a system error based on which he has set aside the duty demand and (ii) that the assessee had submitted the Credit Register at the adjudication stage which corresponds to the credit figure shown .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... manufacturing lubricants, oil and allied products on which central excise duty is being paid. They are availing the benefits of CENVAT Credit as per the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. In the ER-1 returns filed during the period 2010-11, the amount of CENVAT credit disclosed therein did not match with the credit amount disclosed in ER- 4 annual return. The said ER is an annual financial statement, required to be filed electronically in accordance with Rule 12(2)(a) of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Duty demand was confirmed vide Order-in-Original dated 23.1.2016 with interest and imposition of penalty on the differential amount of CENVAT credit appearing in both the returns. In the first appeal filed by assessee, the Ld. Commissioner has set aside .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at an alphabet E with decimal appeared at multiple places which were not entered by the assessee. He submitted that the said system error is clearly evident from the ER-4 and thus the same could not be relied upon to raise demand of irregular credit. He also submitted that ER-1 return is the statutory document which reflects the value of CENVAT Credit taken and utilized for a particular period, which is backed with CENVAT Credit registers maintained by them at the factory. He further submitted that copy of CENVAT Credit Register and revised ER-4 return filled in manually were duly submitted on 24.10.2016 alongwith the Reply to Show Cause Notice at the adjudication stage. He also stated that a certificate from Chartered Acc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ment. He also drew the attention of the Bench to the reply to the Show Cause Notice submitted by the assessee at the adjudication stage wherein they relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Chandigarh Network System Pvt Ltd vs. CCE, Chandigarh-II 2016 (44) STR 603 (Tri-Chan.), wherein the Tribunal held that the only document to check whether the assessee has availed credit wrongly or not is CENVAT Credit Account and not the returns filed although the assessee has shown excess opening balance in the return which could be verified through the CENVAT Credit Account. It is his submission that when the Ld Commissioner has made a categorical finding that credit amount that has been claimed in ER-1 return which is at par with the CENV .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appearing on behalf of the assessee that the Credit amount accounted in the CENVAT Credit Register have to be considered as has been held in the decision of this Tribunal in Chandigarh Network System Pvt Ltd (Supra). In view of the same, I do not find any reason to saddle the assessee with the demand of CENVAT Credit, as has been rightly held by the Ld. Commissioner in the impugned order by setting aside the duty demand. In so far as the issue whether the matter should be remanded back to the original authority is concerned, I find that since the Ld. Commissioner is satisfied on both the counts (i) that there was a system error based on which he has set aside the duty demand and (ii) that the assessee had submitted the Cre .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates