TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 152X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ALORE ] and ITW INDIA LTD. VERSUS COMMR. OF C. EX., CUSTOMS SERVICE TAX, HYDERABAD-I [ 2013 (12) TMI 1618 - CESTAT BANGALORE ] is that when there is no dispute on the receipt of input service and its utilization, credit cannot be denied merely on the basis of wrong address of the appellant in the invoice/Bill of Entry - credit allowed. Denial of CENVAT credit on the basis of attested copies of Bill of Entry - HELD THAT:- It is found that credit has wrongly been denied on the ground that photocopies is not a proper document for claiming the CENVAT credit under Rule 9(1)(b) of CCR - reliance can be placed in the case of M/S BALKRISHNA INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, JAIPUR-I [ 2016 (1) TMI 383 - CESTAT NEW DELHI ] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the facts and the law. He further submitted that the goods covered under invoices/Bill of Entry were, in fact, received at the appellant s factory and the said goods were used for the manufacture of final product and therefore, the technical lapse of the Bill of Entry not having the factory address is not a prima facie reason to reject the CENVAT credit availed by the appellant. He further submitted that the eligibility of goods covered by the Bill of Entry addressed to other factory of the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Order-in-Original, receipt of the goods by the appellant has not been disputed and the credit has been denied only on the ground that the address on the Bill of Entry pertains to the different unit of the appellant. For this submission, he relied upon the following decisions: Godrej Industries Ltd. Vs CCE, Mumbai, 2008 (229) ELT 484 (SC). CCE Cus., Surat Vs Sun Pharmaceuticals Inds, 2015 (326) ELT 3 (SC). 4.2. He further submitted that denial of CENVAT credit on the basis of photocopies of Bill of Entry is also not sustainable in law because in the present case, the appellant lost the Bill of Entry and he has lodged the FIR, the copies of which has been submitted before me and Sworn Af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of all these decisions is that when there is no dispute on the receipt of input service and its utilization, credit cannot be denied merely on the basis of wrong address of the appellant in the invoice/Bill of Entry. As far as denial of CENVAT credit on the basis of attested copies of Bill of Entry is concerned, I find that credit has wrongly been denied on the ground that photocopies is not a proper document for claiming the CENVAT credit under Rule 9(1)(b) of CCR. Further, I find that on an identical issue Division Bench of this Tribunal, in the case of Balkrishna Industries Ltd. cited supra, has held as under in Para 6 which is reproduced herein below: 6. The credit has been disallowed on three grounds (1) The bills of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
