2016 (5) TMI 996 - AT - Central Excise

Recovery of Cenvat credit - sponge iron not used in the manufacture of final product as they were lost in fire - received amounts through insurance claim against loss due to fire - Held that - no evidence or verification has been discussed to support the case of denial of Cenvat credit by the Revenue. As per the statutory records of raw materials and as per claim of the appellant the said raw materials have been used for intended purpose. The compensation of insurance company is for damage to the quality of the raw material. Though the appellant did not produce any documentary evidence to substantiate such claim it is also a fact that Revenue did not produce any evidence of total loss of the said raw materials except referring to the claim and payment with reference to insurance. In the absence of categorical assertion of total loss with evidence, the statutory records maintained by the appellant are to be relied upon. The impugned order is not sustainable and set aside. - Decided in favour of appellant

Summary

Issues: Recovery of Cenvat credit on Sponge Iron lost in fire; Admissibility of insurance claim as evidence.

Recovery of Cenvat Credit on Sponge Iron:
The case involved the appellant, engaged in manufacturing various products liable to Central Excise duty, who received insurance claim amounts for losses due to fire, including 50 M.T. of Sponge Iron. The Department initiated proceedings for the recovery of Cenvat credit on the Sponge Iron not used in the final product due to the fire. The Original Authority confirmed the recovery of credit and imposed a penalty, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant contested the recovery, arguing that all raw materials were used for the intended purpose as per the raw material account, and the insurance claim compensated for the damage to the quality of the raw material, which was still used in the final product.

Admissibility of Insurance Claim as Evidence:
The appellant's counsel contended that there was no evidence presented by the Department to support the denial of Cenvat credit, except for the payment of compensation by the insurance company. On the other hand, the Department argued that the insurance claim indicated a loss of 50 M.T. of Sponge Iron due to fire, making the credit on it inadmissible to the appellant. Upon hearing both sides and examining the appeal records, the Tribunal noted that the demand for recovery of Cenvat credit was solely based on the insurance payment made to the appellant. The appellant maintained that the raw materials were used for the intended purpose, as per statutory records, and the compensation from the insurance company was for the damage to the quality of the raw material, which was indeed used in manufacturing.

Analysis and Decision:
After considering the arguments and evidence presented, the Tribunal found that the Department failed to provide any verification or evidence of total loss of the raw materials apart from referencing the insurance claim and payment. In contrast, the appellant's statutory records and claim indicated that the raw materials were utilized for their intended purpose, despite the damage compensated by the insurance company. The Tribunal emphasized that in the absence of concrete evidence of total loss, the appellant's maintained statutory records should be relied upon. Consequently, the impugned order for recovery of Cenvat credit was deemed unsustainable, leading to its setting aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.