2009 (4) TMI 750 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat/Modvat - Documents for availing credit - Held that - No material is available to show that invoices issued by the manufacturer of inputs are invalid. The original authority observed that the manufacturer of input might have received the scrap along with invoices but not the scrap which was generated in their factory premises. Thus, the allegation against the respondents that scrap along with invoices was not received by the manufacturer of the final product is not sustainable - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of Cenvat credit by original authority.
2. Imposition of penalties on dealers and manufacturers.
3. Allegation of availing credit on the basis of bogus invoices.
4. Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside penalties.
5. Validity of credit availed by manufacturers of final product.
6. Comparison with similar cases and Tribunal decisions.

Analysis:
1. The appeals arose from a common order regarding the disallowance of Cenvat credit by the original authority. The case involved registered dealers issuing invoices based on documents from a manufacturer of inputs, leading to the disallowance of credit by the original authority.

2. Penalties were imposed on the dealers and manufacturers for allegedly availing credit on the basis of invalid invoices. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside these penalties, prompting the Revenue to file appeals against this decision.

3. The Revenue contended that the invoices issued lacked material support, and penalties were justified for wrong credit availment. They argued that the dealers issued invoices without actual goods, leading to penalties. Additionally, the manufacturers were accused of availing credit based on bogus invoices.

4. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the penalties imposed on the dealers and manufacturers. The decision was challenged by the Revenue, leading to further appeals.

5. The Tribunal analyzed the validity of the credit availed by the manufacturers of final products. It was found that the manufacturers availed credit based on invoices from registered dealers, who, in turn, relied on documents from the manufacturer of inputs. The Tribunal observed that no evidence suggested the invalidity of the invoices issued by the manufacturer of inputs.

6. A comparison was drawn with similar cases, highlighting Tribunal decisions that supported the validity of credit availed by manufacturers based on documents from registered dealers. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to set aside penalties, citing precedents and lack of evidence to prove improper credit declaration by the manufacturer of inputs. The appeals filed by the Revenue were rejected based on these findings.