2023 (5) TMI 382 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - duty paying documents - credit on the basis of courier bill of entry for import of their inputs spare parts is valid or not - HELD THAT - It is not in dispute that the appellant /assessee have imported spare parts which are inputs used in the factory for production of excisable goods. The appellant have led sufficient evidence by way of purchase invoices entry of the spare parts received through courier in the statutory records and utilization of the same. It is further found that under the similar disputes this Tribunal have allowed the benefit of cenvat credit on the basis of photocopies of the bill of entries. The Board have also appreciated the difficulty in case of imports of inputs through courier in availing cenvat credit and have given directions that the importer may request courier agency to file separate bill of entry instead of consolidated courier bill of entry for many importers - Further admittedly under the Courier Import Export Regulations the filing of bill of entry is the work of Courier Agency. Accordingly as per the procedures the Courier Agency files consolidated bills of entry in respect of several import parcels belonging to several importers. Accordingly there is no malafide on the part of the appellant in taking cenvat credit on the basis of photocopy of the courier bill of entry. Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues involved: Whether the appellant rightly took cenvat credit based on 'courier bill of entry' for import of inputs - spare parts.

Comprehensive Details:

1. Issue of Cenvat Credit Eligibility: The appellant availed cenvat credit based on photocopies of six Courier Bills of Entries, totaling Rs.77,446. Revenue contended that photocopy of bill of entry is not a prescribed document under Rule 9(1)(c) of CCR. Show cause notice was issued proposing disallowance of credit and penalty for the period May 2016 to November 2016.

2. Defence and Tribunal Rulings: Appellant defended by stating that spare parts were imported through a Courier Agency following Customs procedures. The Courier Agency filed a consolidated bill of entry, providing only a photocopy to the appellant. Appellant cited Tribunal rulings allowing cenvat credit based on photocopies of bill of entries in similar cases, emphasizing proper record maintenance and no dispute regarding duty payment or use of inputs.

3. Adjudication and Appeal: Show cause notice was adjudicated against the appellant, relying on CBEC Circular permitting authorized couriers to file 'regular bill of entry'. The demand was confirmed with a penalty. Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal due to non-payment of pre-deposit.

4. Tribunal Decision: The Tribunal found that the appellant imported spare parts as inputs for production, supported by evidence such as purchase invoices and statutory records. Considering previous Tribunal rulings and the challenges of importing through couriers, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, noting the lack of malafide intent in claiming cenvat credit based on photocopies of courier bill of entry.

5. Conclusion: The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, granting the appellant consequential benefits in accordance with the law.

[Order dictated & pronounced in open court].