2006 (8) TMI 456 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against denial of Modvat credit on original invoice due to lost duplicate copy.

Analysis:
The appeal challenged an order denying Modvat credit to the appellant, who had received packing material but lost the duplicate invoice. The appellant reversed the Modvat credit upon authorities' notice, then applied for permission to avail credit and did so on the same day. The issue revolved around the timing of credit availment and permission. The advocate argued that taking credit on the application date was necessary to comply with Rule 57G(6) to avoid invalidation after six months. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the denial due to lack of permission before credit availed. The DR contended that ex post facto permission was not allowed, justifying the denial.

The Tribunal analyzed Rule 57G(6), which allows credit on original invoice if the duplicate is lost, subject to the Assistant Commissioner's satisfaction of goods receipt and duty payment. The Commissioner's rejection was based on the appellant's self-credit without authority permission, violating the rule's spirit. The Tribunal referenced a Larger Bench decision emphasizing timely permission for credit, safeguarding both manufacturers and revenue. Considering the appellant's substantial Cenvat credit balance and evidence of lost duplicate provided, the Tribunal found no reason to deny Modvat credit on the original document, aligning with the rule's intent and the Larger Bench's guidance.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, emphasizing adherence to Rule 57G(6) and the need for Assistant Commissioner's consideration based on goods receipt and duty payment, rather than denying credit based on post facto permission. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of evidence and compliance with legal provisions for availing Modvat credit on lost duplicate invoices.