2009 (10) TMI 755 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order disallowing Modvat credit based on various grounds

Analysis:
The judgment involves an appeal challenging an order disallowing Modvat credit to the appellants. The Additional Commissioner had disallowed the credit and ordered recovery under Rule 57(1) of the Rules along with interest and penalty. The appellants contested the order, arguing that the denial lacked proper basis. The challenge focused on specific amounts of credit denied, such as Rs. 93,988/- for lack of godown facility, Rs. 1,83,718/- for alleged non-transport vehicles, Rs. 3,50,114/- for transportation denial by transporters, Rs. 3,42,678/- for fake addresses of vehicle owners, and Rs. 39,085/- without specified grounds. The advocate for the appellants presented evidence of payment and transportation to support their case.

The Tribunal noted that the mere production of a statement of account does not prove actual payment unless supported by relevant details. The weighment slips provided were not related to denied transportations or non-transport vehicles, failing to establish faults in the denial findings. However, a prima facie case was acknowledged for credit denial based on fake addresses and unspecified grounds. The appellants were directed to deposit Rs. 6,35,410/- within eight weeks, with waived interest and penalty until appeal disposal. The judgment emphasized the necessity of depositing the required amount to address the denial of Modvat credit.

The judgment concluded by setting a compliance reporting date for the appellants to follow up on the deposit requirement. Overall, the Tribunal partially allowed the application, directing the appellants to deposit a specified sum while temporarily waiving interest and penalty, pending appeal resolution. The decision highlighted the importance of substantiating claims and addressing specific grounds for credit denial in excise matters.