2009 (11) TMI 68 - HC - Central Excise

Duty paying document Cenvat Credit - The Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding that the invoices on the basis of which cenvat credit has been claimed had mentioned vehicle numbers which were found to be fictitious. The Tribunal also took note of the fact that the consignor M/s Northern Industrial Corporation who had issued invoices did not even produced any GR or lorry receipt in support of the claim of having dispatched the goods and it was found to be a common practice for the trucks to use the fake number plates. In respect of two invoices issued by M/s Northern Industrial Corporation to M/s Avtar Foundry and Workshop on their physical verification it was found that no goods have been received. It was taken to mean that M/s Northern Industrial Corporation indeed issued invoices without sending any goods. After recording the aforesaid finding, the Tribunal concluded that the cenvat credit has been rightly denied and equal amount of penalty on the appellant company under Section 11 AC of the Act was also upheld. Held that - there are pure findings of fact and false claim of cenvat credit was made by the dealer appellant order of tribunal upheld

Summary

Issues involved:
Appeal under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding denial of cenvate credit and imposition of penalty.

Analysis:
The High Court judgment pertains to an appeal filed under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal had found that the invoices used to claim cenvate credit contained fictitious vehicle numbers, and the consignor did not provide any supporting documents like GR or lorry receipts. The Tribunal observed a common practice of using fake number plates on trucks. Physical verification revealed that goods were not received for certain invoices, indicating that invoices were issued without dispatching any goods. Consequently, the Tribunal denied cenvate credit and upheld the penalty under Section 11 AC of the Act against the appellant company.

The High Court, after hearing the arguments, affirmed the Tribunal's findings as pure facts, emphasizing the false claim of cenvate credit made by the dealer-appellant. It concluded that the lower authorities' orders and the Tribunal's decision were legally sound, with no substantial question of law raised under Section 35G of the Act to warrant the appeal's admission. The Court deemed the appeal to be without merit and dismissed it accordingly.

The judgment was delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M. Kumar and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jaswant Singh. The decision was made on 30th November 2009.