TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 829X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by them do not disclose absence of receipt of inputs in the factory and there is no cogent evidence of disposal of the same goods elsewhere the credit cannot be denied. It is also not the case of the department that the appellant have procured some unaccounted inputs to cover up the quantity of input shown in the invoices. There is no allegation by the department regarding the financial flow back that against the invoices for which the payments were made through cheque, any cash payment was received by the appellant. With all these undisputed facts, merely on the basis of the transporter records and RTO check-post reports, it cannot be concluded that the inputs were not received by the appellant - the denial of Cenvat credit on the basis of the investigations conducted at the third party end cannot be adopted as the sole basis for denial of credit. The Appellant correctly availed the cenvat credit. Further, the department nowhere raised any dispute on the said records. Thus the contention of the department that appellant have availed cenvat credit without receipt of goods (raw material) is not tenable. Further, as the Appellant have discharged the Central Excise duty on the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ealers of Gujarat and Daman and credit was availed by them on the strength of only bills of entry/invoices and bogus LRs were prepared while the goods were sold in or around Delhi only. It therefore, appeared that M/s Pranav and M/s Onkar did not receive the goods and they have issued only invoices to Appellant and other units to enable them to avail cenvat credit. 1.2 The investigation was carried out with respect to the vehicles mentioned in the input invoices used for transporting the goods from transporters/ check posts/ RTO. The documents recovered from M/s Singhal Road Carriers were scrutinized and it was found that said transporter was transporting goods other than copper form New Delhi to Ahmedabad and such other goods were entered in their delivery registers recovered from their Ahmedabad branch office. On the same date and for the same truck, M/s Singhal Road Carriers issued another LR for transportation of copper ingots/ wire bars to the manufacturers of articles of copper of Gujrat, Daman or Silvassa. The vehicles actually transported other goods and hence the stamps of the checkpost of Commercial Tax department were affixed on the transport documents. The investigat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... annot in any way conclude that the appellant manufacturer has not received the inputs form registered dealer at Nadiad. 2.1 He also submits that during the investigation, the appellant shown the Octroi receipt for payment of octroi duty on transportation of goods from Nadiad to Ahmedabad. During the material period, Octroi was leviable on goods entering the city limit of Ahmedabad and the same was duly paid. This conclusive evidence has shown movement and receipt of goods from Nadiad to the appellant factory. Apart from octroi receipt, the copies of invoices and ledger account for payment of goods against the invoices are also on record. The accounting of input and statutory record i.e . RG23A Part I account as well as in private stock ledger of the Appellant is also on record. The Appellant had in fact received and utilized the inputs for manufacture of finished goods. 2.2 He argued that under Central Excise Act and Cenvat Credit Rules, the Appellant is required to have proper duty paying documents as well as proper accounting of the material. Both these conditions are satisfied in the present case. 2.3 He further submits that during the investigation statement of directo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot the case of the department that the appellant have procured some unaccounted inputs to cover up the quantity of input shown in the invoices. There is no allegation by the department regarding the financial flow back that against the invoices for which the payments were made through cheque, any cash payment was received by the appellant. With all these undisputed facts, merely on the basis of the transporter records and RTO check-post reports, it cannot be concluded that the inputs were not received by the appellant. In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, I find that the denial of Cenvat credit on the basis of the investigations conducted at the third party end cannot be adopted as the sole basis for denial of credit. 4.1 I also find that in Cenvat Credit Rules 2004 some minimum precaution was prescribed to ascertain the bona fide on the part of consignor of input i.e. under Rule 4 and Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules 2004. I note in the above rules, it is provided that credit can be taken on the basis of invoices after the inputs covered by such invoice is received. It is important that goods covered by the invoices are received by the manufacturer in their factory. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
