2009 (11) TMI 66 - HC - Central Excise

Cenvat credit allegation of non receipt of inputs reliance on octroi receipts held that - no reliance could be placed on the octroi receipts which do not contain any iota of evidence that the material mentioned therein had been cleared/sold - It was further held that no enquiry was made by the Revenue from the Octroi Post Authorities as to how and on what basis octroi receipts were issued and, therefore, the charges against the dealer-assessee remained unsubstantiated revenue appeal dismissed

Summary

Issues:
- Interpretation of evidence from octroi receipts for claiming cenvat credit fraudulently.

Analysis:
The High Court was presented with an appeal challenging an order passed by the Tribunal regarding the authenticity of octroi receipts as evidence for claiming cenvat credit fraudulently. The main question of law was whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that octroi receipts, lacking consignor's details, do not provide sufficient evidence to establish the receipt of goods by the parties for cenvat credit. The Court referred to a previous case where it was held that mere octroi receipts without specific details linking the goods to the concerned party do not substantiate the claim. The Court emphasized that the octroi receipts should clearly identify the consignor and contain relevant details for verification. It was noted that without proper verification from the Octroi Post Authorities, the charges against the dealer-assessee remained unsubstantiated.

The Court highlighted that the Tribunal's decision was based on factual findings and not on any substantial question of law. Drawing parallels with a similar case, the Court dismissed the appeal on the grounds that the evidence presented through octroi receipts was insufficient to prove the receipt of goods by the parties for cenvat credit. The judgment emphasized the importance of concrete evidence with specific details to support claims of cenvat credit fraudulently. The Court concluded that without proper verification and clear linkage between the goods and the concerned party, the octroi receipts alone were not adequate to establish the legitimacy of the cenvat credit claim.

In the final decision, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that no substantive question of law arose for determination as the matter primarily involved factual findings. The judgment reiterated that the mere presence of octroi receipts without explicit references to the consignor's details and bill numbers does not suffice as evidence for cenvat credit claims. The importance of thorough verification and concrete evidence to substantiate claims related to cenvat credit fraudulently was underscored throughout the judgment.