2015 (10) TMI 624 - AT - Central Excise

Fraudulent availment of CENVAT Credit - Bogus invoices - Issue of invoices without actual receipt of raw material - Held that - department has been able to safely establish fraudulent activities of appellant. The recovery of 19 invoices together with the discovery of the fact that there were no goods corresponding to such invoices in the godown and no sales invoices were issued for sale of such goods alongwith statement of Shri Happy Gupta, and other vehicle owners/drivers establish the case of the department regarding fake invoices. Moreover, it has to be stated that the appellant has not replied to the SCN even after getting ample opportunity. These contentions in defence are raised only at appellate stage. There is actually no defence raised at the primary adjudication level. - No infirmity in the impugned order - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues: Alleged fraudulent availing of Modvat/Cenvat credit based on fictitious invoices.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Background and Allegations:
The appellant was accused of availing Modvat/Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 6,27,387 based on fictitious invoices without actually receiving any goods. The investigation revealed discrepancies in the invoices issued by M/s HBR Steel Corporation, leading to the issuance of a show cause notice proposing disallowance of credit.

2. Adjudication and Appeal:
The case underwent adjudication, and the Commissioner (Appeals) initially allowed the appeal citing a violation of principles of natural justice. However, the Revenue appealed before the Tribunal, which remanded the case for de novo adjudication. Subsequently, the Order-in-Original confirmed the demand, with the appellant failing to respond or attend hearings, leading to dismissal of appeals.

3. Further Appeals and Compliance:
The appellant appealed before the Commissioner (Appeals), who directed a pre-deposit, which the appellant failed to comply with initially. After subsequent directions from the Tribunal, the appellant made the required deposit. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the disallowance of credit, leading to the appellant's appeal before the Tribunal.

4. Arguments and Findings:
The appellant argued against the allegations, claiming lack of evidence and procedural irregularities. However, the Revenue supported the denial of credit. The Tribunal considered the fraudulent availing of credit based on fictitious invoices, where investigations revealed discrepancies in the vehicle numbers mentioned in the invoices, indicating no actual receipt of goods.

5. Decision and Rationale:
The Tribunal found no infirmity in the impugned order, upholding the denial of credit based on the evidence presented, including statements from involved parties and the lack of response from the appellant. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the establishment of fraudulent activities through investigations and statements, concluding the case in favor of the Revenue.

This detailed analysis encapsulates the legal proceedings, arguments presented, findings, and the final decision of the Tribunal regarding the alleged fraudulent availing of Modvat/Cenvat credit based on fictitious invoices.