2018 (3) TMI 1538 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT credit - time limitation - It is alleged in the show-cause notice that the closing balances of inputs lying in stock after physical verification were reduced to the extent of the quantity found short - Held that - It is seen that the lower authorities have not examined the issue of limitation. Hence, it is required to be examined by the lower authorities - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Disallowance of Cenvat credit for shortage in stock
- Admissibility of annexure to show-cause notice
- Violation of principles of natural justice
- Examination of limitation issue

Analysis:
1. Disallowance of Cenvat credit for shortage in stock:
The appellant had a system of periodical physical stock taking for finished goods and inputs. The Central Excise officers found a shortage in the closing balance of inputs during a stock taking in December 2005, leading to a requirement for the appellant to reverse Cenvat credit of ?6,58,590. A show-cause notice was issued, and the authorities disallowed the credit along with interest and imposed a penalty. The appellant contended that there was no shortage of input as alleged and that the entire case was based on unsubstantiated records.

2. Admissibility of annexure to show-cause notice:
The appellant argued that the annexure to the show-cause notice, which formed the basis of the charges, was not admissible as evidence since it was a handwritten document. Additionally, the appellant claimed that no stock verification report was ever submitted to them, raising concerns about the reliance on unsubstantiated records by the department. The appellant referred to various case laws to support the argument that reliance on such documents violates principles of natural justice.

3. Violation of principles of natural justice:
The appellant highlighted that the show-cause notice was issued based on a verification report prepared by the appellant, and the department's case rested on records that were not substantiated. The appellant contended that the non-supply of the verification report and the reliance on questionable documents were violations of the principles of natural justice, impacting the fairness of the proceedings.

4. Examination of limitation issue:
While upholding the impugned order on merit, the Tribunal noted that the issue of limitation was not adequately examined by the lower authorities. The Tribunal directed the matter to be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for a thorough examination of the appellant's submission on limitation and to pass an order in accordance with the law. This decision indicates the importance of addressing procedural aspects such as limitation in addition to the substantive merits of the case.