9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (7) TMI 573 - AT - Central ExciseWaiver of predeposit of CENVAT credit - Denial of Credit based on photocopy of invoices, consolidated original Bill of Entry and on the ground that the procedure as per Board s Circular No. 31/2007-Cus. dated 29.8.2007 was not followed - Held that - denial of credit on the basis of consolidated original Bill of Entry is, prima facie, covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Fusion Electronics (P) Ltd. (2010 (11) TMI 285 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI). Tribunal in the case of Hi-Tech Inks P. Ltd. (2013 (12) TMI 932 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD) after considering the various decisions observed that CENVAT credit is not eligible on the basis of the photocopy of the Bill of Entry. Hence the applicant failed to make out a prima facie case for waiver of entire amount of dues. It is seen that the adjudicating authority had already allowed credit on the basis of the original copy of the Bill of Entry. The applicant had not filed any affidavit or FIR etc. in respect of loss of original copy of Bill of Entry - Conditional stay granted.
Issues:
1. Denial of CENVAT credit based on photocopy of Bill of Entry. 2. Denial of CENVAT credit based on consolidated original Bill of Entry. 3. Prima facie case for waiver of entire amount of dues. Analysis: 1. The appellant sought waiver of predeposit of CENVAT credit amounting to Rs. 1,33,660/- along with interest and penalty. The appellant availed credit of Rs. 46,832/- based on a photocopy of the Bill of Entry due to the unavailability of the original. The counsel cited a Tribunal case where credit was allowed in a similar situation. The remaining Rs. 86,828/- was based on a consolidated original Bill of Entry, and credit was denied for not following the procedure outlined in a Board's Circular. The appellant argued eligibility for credit as both Bills of Entry were in their name. 2. The Revenue contended that a Tribunal case had denied credit based on a photocopy of the Bill of Entry when the original was lost in a fire. They highlighted that the Board's circular was not considered in the decisions cited by the appellant. The Tribunal found that denial of credit based on the consolidated original Bill of Entry was covered by a previous decision. It acknowledged the Revenue's argument that CENVAT credit was not eligible based on a photocopy of the Bill of Entry, as observed in another Tribunal case. The appellant failed to establish a prima facie case for waiving the entire dues, especially since the original Bill of Entry was already accepted by the adjudicating authority. No affidavit or FIR regarding the loss of the original Bill of Entry was provided. 3. The Tribunal directed the appellant to make a predeposit of Rs. 30,000/- within six weeks, with a compliance report due on a specified date. Upon this deposit, the predeposit of the remaining dues would be waived, and recovery during the appeal's pendency was stayed. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in an open court setting.
|
