2015 (10) TMI 277 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of cenvat credit - whether CVD credit availed by the appellant on T.R.6 challan is a valid documents for availing the credit of CVD paid by the appellant on the Jumbo Rolls purchased through auction from Customs - held that - Appellant has rightly availed credit based on T.R.6 challan which is duly certified by Kandla Customs. In view of above facts and relying on the above decisions, I hold that credit availed by the appellant on the T.R.6 challan which is duly supported by the Customs by a certificate is a valid document for availing credit. The case law relied by Revenue is not applicable to the present case as it pertained to sale of goods by the ship breaker. In the said case, it was held that vessel was not imported by auction purchaser who is not an importer and it was sold with condition that no customs duty was payable on it whereas in the present case it is purchase of imported goods for which duty has been validly paid. - impugned order is set aside - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Denial of cenvat credit on CVD paid on Jumbo Rolls of Cinematographic Film purchased from Customs auction/sale based on T.R.6 challan.

Analysis:
The primary issue in this appeal pertains to the denial of cenvat credit by the appellant on the Countervailing Duty (CVD) paid on Jumbo Rolls of Cinematographic Film acquired from a Customs auction using a T.R.6 challan. The adjudicating authority disallowed the credit, citing that the T.R.6 challan was not a specified document under the Modvat/Cenvat Rules. The appellate authority upheld this decision, leading to the appellant's appeal being rejected.

The appellant argued that despite not being the original importers, they purchased the Jumbo Rolls from a Customs auction through the T.R.6 challan, which included the CVD amount. They contended that the T.R.6 challan should be considered a valid document for availing cenvat credit, supported by Notification No.16/94-CE (NT) listing permissible documents for credit availing. The appellant also presented relevant certificates and relied on previous tribunal decisions to support their case.

Upon review, it was established that the appellant, a PSU engaged in manufacturing photographic films, acquired the Jumbo Rolls post-confiscation by Customs, making them the rightful buyers. The T.R.6 challan clearly indicated payment inclusive of CVD, further supported by a certificate from the Customs, confirming duty payment. The tribunal referenced a similar case to affirm the validity of the T.R.6 challan as a primary document for duty payment, emphasizing its importance in verifying duty clearance post-import.

Conclusively, the tribunal deemed the appellant's credit availed through the T.R.6 challan, backed by Customs certification, as valid for credit purposes. The tribunal distinguished the cited case law by the Revenue, highlighting its inapplicability to the current scenario due to differing circumstances. Consequently, the impugned order disallowing the credit was overturned, and the appeal was granted in favor of the appellant.

This detailed analysis underscores the significance of documentary evidence, adherence to relevant regulations, and the contextual interpretation of legal precedents in resolving the issue of cenvat credit denial based on the T.R.6 challan in the acquisition of Cinematographic Film Jumbo Rolls from a Customs auction.