2020 (1) TMI 1456 - AT - Central Excise

MODVAT Credit - receipt of inputs under the cover of an invoice issued u/r 52A - HELD THAT - The issue is no more res integra and have decided by the various Benches of the Tribunal and also Hon ble High Courts and the Hon ble Supreme Court. The decision of this Bench of the Tribunal in TATA IRON STEEL COMPANY LTD. VERSUS COMMR. OF C. EX., JAMSHEDPUR 2000 (11) TMI 248 - CEGAT, KOLKATA as relied upon by the learned Authorized Representative has been distinguished by the Hon ble High Court of Bombay in the case of MARMAGOA STEEL LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA 2005 (4) TMI 89 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY . Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA VERSUS MARMAGOA STEEL LTD. 2008 (7) TMI 95 - SUPREME COURT has held that in respect of quantity of 212.659 MT scrap, triplicate copy of B/E was not produced, so credit is denied. Following the judgements of the Hon ble High Courts and the Hon ble Supreme Court, the impugned orders are upheld - Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against Order-in-Original dropping proceedings initiated through show cause notices.
2. Applicability of Circular No.179/13/96-CX regarding availing Cenvat credit.
3. Examination of impugned input storage and ex-bond clearance process.
4. Dispute related to Bills of Entries for ex-bond clearance.
5. Validity of Bills of Entry for availing Cenvat credit.
6. Jurisdictional issues and examination of Cenvat records.
7. Interpretation of relevant legal provisions and precedents.

Issue 1:
The appeals were filed against Orders-in-Original dropping proceedings initiated through show cause notices. The Tribunal took both appeals together for hearing.

Issue 2:
The key argument revolved around the applicability of Circular No.179/13/96-CX regarding availing Cenvat credit. The appellant department contended that the circular did not apply as the bill of entry was in the name of another concern, not the registered office of the assessee.

Issue 3:
It was raised that the adjudicating authority did not examine whether the impugned input was initially stored in a warehouse before ex-bond clearance and diversion.

Issue 4:
The dispute in one appeal related to Methanal covered by Bills of Entry, while the other appeal concerned Bills of Entries for ex-bond clearance for home consumption.

Issue 5:
Validity of Bills of Entry for availing Cenvat credit was discussed, emphasizing the transfer of goods to the respondent for utilization in final products and availing credit as per Circular No.179/13/96-CX.

Issue 6:
Jurisdictional issues and examination of Cenvat records were highlighted, with the respondent arguing that the Central Excise authorities had inspected the Cenvat records multiple times without raising objections.

Issue 7:
The Tribunal analyzed relevant legal provisions and precedents. It distinguished a previous decision and referred to judgments of the Hon'ble High Courts and the Supreme Court to uphold the impugned orders, rejecting the appeals.

This comprehensive analysis covered the various legal issues raised in the judgment, including the interpretation of Circulars, examination of storage and clearance processes, validity of Bills of Entry for credit availing, and the application of legal precedents to reach a decision.