2016 (12) TMI 1707 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT crdit - duty paying documents - it was found that M/s. M.K. Steels Pvt. Ltd. has issued the same invoices in number of cases from Kolkata - Held that - issue is squarely covered by the decision in the case of The Commissioner of Central Excise Customs & Service Tax Versus M/s. Juhi Alloys Ltd., Anil Kumar Shukla 2014 (1) TMI 1475 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT , where it was held that The goods where demonstrated to have travelled to the premises of the assesee under the cover of Form 31 issued by the Trade Tax Department, and the ledger account as well as the statutory records establish the receipt of the goods. In such a situation, It would be impractical to require the assessee to go behind the records maintained by the first stage dealer - credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against Order-in-Original No.4/Commr./2008 dated 16.06.2008 regarding the procurement of raw materials through M/s M.K. Steels Pvt. Ltd.

Analysis:
The appellant, involved in manufacturing MS Bars, Rounds, SS flats, and SS Products, received raw materials from M/s M.K. Steels Pvt. Ltd. under form 31 issued by the Trade Tax Department. Subsequently, it was discovered that the same invoices were issued by M/s. M.K. Steels Pvt. Ltd. in multiple instances from Kolkata. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court decision in another case highlighted the importance of the assessee taking reasonable steps to ensure the payment of appropriate excise duty on inputs. The court noted that the appellant acted diligently in its dealings with the first stage dealer, as evidenced by statutory records and the receipt of goods under Form 31.

Both parties in the present case acknowledged that the issue aligns with previous Tribunal decisions and the principles established by the jurisdictional High Court. After considering all facts and circumstances, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, ultimately allowing both appeals and granting consequential relief to the appellant. The judgment emphasizes the importance of diligence and reasonable steps in verifying the payment of excise duty on inputs, as well as the significance of maintaining accurate statutory records to support transactions.