2016 (7) TMI 985 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat Credit - Duty paying documents - invoices issued by the sister unit - Invoices do not contain all the prescribed particulars required in terms of Rule 9(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules 2004. - Held that - In any case there is no dispute about the duty paid nature of imported goods which they have received and used in the factory for manufacture of final products. The case laws cited by the appellant support the view that credit would not be denied on the ground that the document does not contain all the particulars required to be contained under the rules if the documents contain details of the payment of duty description of the goods assessable value name and particulars of the factory of the receiver. The Chartered Accountant s Certificate obtained and furnished by the appellant to the Commissioner also convinces us of the fact that the total cenvat credit taken by both units did not exceed the CVD paid in respect of the bills of entries under which the supplier unit imported the goods. Accordingly we have no hesitation in concluding that the appellant is entitled to cenvat credit and consequently we set-aside the impugned order. - Credit allowed - Decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues: Disallowance of cenvat credit under Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules based on invoices issued by sister unit without Central Excise registration.

In this case, the appellant availed cenvat credit on imported raw petroleum coke transferred by their sister unit under commercial invoices. The Commissioner disallowed the credit citing non-approval of invoices under Rule 9(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules due to lack of Central Excise registration by the importer. The appellant contended that Rule 9(1)(a)(ii) allows credit based on importer's invoices without registration, requiring registration only for depot or consignment agent clearance. They also argued that the invoices contained necessary particulars except the registration number, which is not mandatory. The appellant presented a Chartered Accountant's Certificate confirming compliance with CVD payments. The Tribunal noted that Rule 9(1)(a) permits credit based on importer's invoices without registration unless goods are cleared from depot/consignment agent. The Commissioner's insistence on registration was based on CBEC Manual instructions for first and second stage dealers, not importers. The Tribunal referenced CBEC Manual sections specifying registration requirements for different entities, clarifying that importer registration is not mandatory for availing credit. The Tribunal also highlighted that the invoices contained all necessary particulars except the registration number, which was not a mandatory requirement. The Tribunal relied on case laws supporting credit entitlement despite minor document discrepancies if essential details like duty payment, goods description, and receiver's particulars are present. The Chartered Accountant's Certificate further supported the appellant's compliance with CVD payments. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner's order and affirming the appellant's entitlement to cenvat credit.

This detailed analysis covers the issues of disallowance of cenvat credit under Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules based on invoices issued by the sister unit without Central Excise registration. The judgment provides a comprehensive examination of the legal framework, relevant rules, CBEC Manual instructions, case laws, and the appellant's evidence to support the conclusion in favor of the appellant's entitlement to cenvat credit.