2011 (6) TMI 347 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat credit - Credit availed on the basis of fake and fictitious invoices issued by manufacturers which were found to be non-existent - Held that - As in identical situation in the case of M/s Bhagwati Silk Mills 2011 (2) TMI 889 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD & Roop Dyg. & Ptg. Mills Pvt. Ltd. 2011 (1) TMI 239 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD has modified the earlier stay order and remanded the matters to original adjudicating authority for fresh decision - The appeals are allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
CENVAT credit denial based on fake invoices.

Analysis:
The judgment by Mrs. Archana Wadhwa of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad dealt with the denial of CENVAT credit to the appellants due to the utilization of fake and fictitious invoices issued by non-existent manufacturers. The appellants were directed to deposit 25% of the duty within eight weeks as per Order No.S/1158-1159/WZB/AHD/2010. The Tribunal had previously decided similar cases involving other appellants, such as M/s Bhagwati Silk Mills and Roop Dyg. & Ptg. Mills Pvt. Ltd. In the case of M/s Bhagwati Silk Mills, Order No.A/55-185/WZB/AHD/2011 dated 24.01.2011 was referenced, while in the case of Roop Dyg. & Ptg. Mills Pvt. Ltd., Order No.A/336-346/WZB/AHD/2011, dt.21.2.2011, the Tribunal had modified the stay order and remanded the matters for a fresh decision.

In line with the decisions in the cases of M/s Bhagwati Silk Mills and Roop Dyg. & Ptg. Mills Pvt. Ltd., Mrs. Archana Wadhwa modified the stay order dated 1.10.10, set aside the impugned order, and remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority for a fresh decision. The judgment allowed the appeals by way of remand, emphasizing the need for a decision in accordance with the observations made in the aforementioned judgments. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in court, providing a clear direction for the further proceedings in the case.