2022 (7) TMI 455 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - duty paying invoices - credit availed on the strength of Xerox copies of the purchase invoices - HELD THAT - The credit was denied only on the basis that appellant failed to produce original copy of invoices. However, there is no dispute as regards the purchase of goods and use thereof in the manufacture of final product. The goods is entered in the purchase accounts and therefore, purchase of goods, receipt and use thereof in the manufacture of final products is not disputed. Merely because the original copy of invoice is not available, it cannot alter the important criteria of availing the credit when it is satisfies other criteria. It is settled that availment of credit on the strength of photo copies of the invoices is just a procedural lapse and cannot be made the basis to disallow the credit. For this reason, in the absence of any evidence that appellant had not received the goods, credit cannot be denied. The reasons for denial of credit is not sustainable - credit allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues involved: Denial of Cenvat credit based on Xerox copies of purchase invoices.

Analysis:

1. Issue of Denial of Cenvat Credit: The main issue in this case revolved around the denial of Cenvat credit by the Revenue on the basis of Xerox copies of purchase invoices. The Revenue contended that the appellant should have availed the credit on original copies of the invoices, and therefore, denied the credit on photocopies. However, the Tribunal noted that there was no dispute regarding the purchase of goods and their use in the manufacture of final products. The absence of original copies of invoices should not alter the criteria for availing credit when other conditions are satisfied. The Tribunal highlighted that the purchase of goods was duly recorded in the accounts, and the lack of original invoices should not be a reason to disallow the credit.

2. Legal Precedents: The Tribunal considered various legal precedents cited by both parties. While the Revenue relied on judgments such as CCE, Raipur vs. Vandana Energy & Steel and Hi-Tech Inks P Limited vs. CCE, Daman, the Tribunal also noted judgments favoring the appellant. These included cases like CCE & Cus, Vadodara-II vs. Steelco Hujarat Limited and Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Limited vs. CCE, Trichy. The Tribunal emphasized that availing credit based on photocopies of invoices is a procedural lapse and should not be the sole reason to disallow the credit.

3. Decision and Rationale: After reviewing the arguments and legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the denial of credit based on the absence of original invoices was not sustainable. The Tribunal held that without evidence showing that the goods were not received, the credit could not be denied solely on the basis of using Xerox copies of invoices. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. The Tribunal clarified that procedural lapses like using photocopies should not hinder legitimate credit claims when all other criteria are met.

In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing that the denial of Cenvat credit based on Xerox copies of purchase invoices was unjustified. The decision highlighted the importance of focusing on the substance of the transaction rather than procedural technicalities when assessing credit claims.