2019 (10) TMI 1414 - AT - Central Excise

Availment and utilization of Cenvat Credit - Duty paying documents - credit availed of duty passed on, on the basis of supplementary invoices issued by M/s.TRL, which were not considered as eligible documents as per Rule 9(1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - HELD THAT - The input supplier issued supplementary invoices to the appellants whereby additional duty was paid. There are no reason to hold that the supplementary invoice evidencing payment of additional duty amount should be treated on a different footing vis- -vis the original invoices evidencing payment of duty on the said goods in as much as both these documents were issued under the same provisions of law. If the appellant were entitled to take credit on their inputs on the strength of the original invoices issued by the supplier, they can validly claim to be entitled to take Cenvat credit of the additional amounts of duty paid on the same goods by the supplier under the supplementary invoices. In any case it was not in dispute that the inputs were received in the appellant s factory. The substantive requirement of Cenvat credit were thus met by the party. The benefit was not liable to be denied on procedural grounds. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Availment and utilization of Cenvat Credit based on supplementary invoices issued by the input supplier.

Analysis:
The appeal pertained to an earlier period, and the appellant challenged Order-in-Appeal No.34/KOL-II/2013 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise(Appeals), Kolkata-III. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing Motor Vehicle parts, faced a dispute related to Cenvat Credit from August 2008 to October 15, 2011. The issue revolved around the appellant availing Cenvat Credit of duty passed on by M/s.Tata Ryerson Limited (M/s.TRL) under supplementary invoices, which were contested as ineligible documents under Rule 9(1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Adjudicating authority disallowed the Cenvat credit, demanded recovery of &8377; 42458/- with interest, and imposed a penalty under Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944, leading to the present appeal before the Tribunal.

The Authorized Representative for the Respondent Revenue cited a relevant Final Order in a similar case where the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal, in its analysis, found that the input supplier issued supplementary invoices to the appellants, reflecting additional duty paid. It was concluded that there was no valid reason to differentiate between the original invoices and supplementary invoices concerning the duty paid on the goods. The Tribunal held that if the appellant was entitled to claim credit based on the original invoices, they could similarly claim Cenvat credit for the additional duty amounts paid by the supplier under the supplementary invoices. The Tribunal emphasized that the substantive requirement for Cenvat credit was fulfilled as the inputs were received at the appellant's factory, and the benefit could not be denied on procedural grounds.

Consequently, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal filed by the appellant with any consequential benefits. The operative part of the order was pronounced in the open Court, providing relief to the appellant regarding the availment and utilization of Cenvat Credit based on the supplementary invoices issued by the input supplier.