2017 (12) TMI 1487 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT credit - duty paying documents - denial of credit on the ground that the same has been availed on the basis of photo copies of the invoices, which cannot be held to be eligible documents - Held that - learned advocate submits that though the documents could not be produced before Audit Officer but during the adjudication, they contended that such original invoices are available with them and they should be given an opportunity to produce the same. The said plea of the appellant does not stand considered by the authorities below - matter remanded to the Original Adjudicating Authority for examination of the documents to be produced by the appellant, for which they would be given an opportunity - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Denial of Cenvat Credit based on invoices being photo copies.
2. Objection of invoices being in the name of Head Office for factory premises.

Analysis:
1. The appellant's Cenvat Credit of around ?70,000 was denied due to being availed based on photo copies of invoices, deemed ineligible. The Revenue objected that the invoices were in the name of the Head Office, not the factory premises. The learned advocate argued that the service tax for GTA services was paid by the Head Office under Reverse Charge Basis, justifying the invoice details. Citing precedents, it was established that denial of credit solely based on invoices being in the Head Office's name is unwarranted. The Tribunal's decision in a similar case supported this stance, leading to setting aside this ground for credit denial.

2. Regarding the objection on availing credit based on photo copies, the advocate explained that original invoices were available but not produced before the Audit Officer. During adjudication, the appellant requested an opportunity to present the original invoices. This plea was overlooked by the authorities, despite no doubts on the duty paid nature of the inputs and their utilization in the factory. The appellant expressed willingness to furnish the original invoices if given a chance. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Original Adjudicating Authority for document examination upon production by the appellant, ensuring a fair opportunity for substantiation. The appeal was disposed of under these terms.