2019 (5) TMI 580 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - duty paying documents - it was alleged that since the Bill of Entries were in the name of M/s Castrol, the Appellant have wrongly availed the credit on the basis of invalid document in contravention of Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules - HELD THAT - When the goods has reached the Appellant under the cover of declaration by M/s Castrol and there is no dispute about the non availment of credit by M/s Castrol as well as the use of inputs by the Appellant in manufacture of finished goods which is evident from the lorry receipts, goods receipt note, maintenance of raw material account in that case there is no reason to deny credit to the Appellant - it is also found from the Public Notice 34/2006 dated 24.05.2006 issued by the Commissioner, Customs, JNCH that the requirement of endorsement by the Customs officer on Bill of Entry has been dispensed with. The Appellant are eligible for CENVAT credit on impugned Bills of Entry - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Appellant availed credit of raw material based on Bill of Entries; Denial of credit under Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules; Validity of endorsement on Bill of Entries; Time-barred demands; Applicability of judgments in similar cases.

Analysis:
The Appellant filed appeals against Orders by the Commissioner denying credit of raw material availed based on Bill of Entries showing another company as the importer. The dispute arose as the Bill of Entries were not endorsed by the customs officer, contravening Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The revenue issued show cause notices proposing to deny the credit and impose penalties. The Appellant argued that despite the lack of endorsement, the goods were received and used in manufacturing finished products, supported by documentation like Goods Receipt Note and delivery challans. The Appellant relied on various judgments supporting their position, emphasizing the usage and non-disputed consumption of raw materials.

The revenue contended that without proper endorsement on the Bill of Entries, credit was inadmissible. However, the Tribunal found that the goods were received with a declaration by the importing company that the credit would be availed by the Appellant. The Appellant's use of the inputs in manufacturing finished goods was evident from their records, and the non-availment of credit by the importing company was established. The Tribunal also noted a Public Notice dispensing with the requirement of customs officer endorsement on Bill of Entries. Citing precedents like Marmagoa Steel Ltd. and Advanced Enzyme Technologies Ltd., the Tribunal held that the Appellant was eligible for cenvat credit despite the lack of endorsement on the Bill of Entries.

In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the Appellant, setting aside the impugned orders and allowing the appeals with any consequential reliefs. The decision was based on the established receipt and use of goods, supported by relevant documentation and legal precedents upholding similar cases.