2004 (12) TMI 168 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Denial of credit under RG 23A Part I and imposition of penalty

In this case, the appellants were denied credit of Rs. 29,442/- and a penalty of Rs. 3,000/- was imposed on them for not making an entry in RG 23A Part I despite receiving inputs under invoice No. 33, dated 8-7-1999. The learned Consultant for the appellants argued that the entry for one quality of goods was mistakenly made in RG 23A Part I, while the entry for the other quality was omitted, although the full credit was entered in RG 23A Part II. The appellants produced an affidavit of the supplier and his RG 23D Register to support their claim. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected this evidence, but the Tribunal found that the goods were received under one invoice containing two qualities, and the error in entry was clerical. The Tribunal referred to previous decisions where credit could not be denied for non-entry in RG 23A Part I if the inputs were used in manufacturing the final product. The Tribunal concluded that the denial of credit and penalty were unjustified, as it was a clerical error and the goods were indeed received by the appellants. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and allowed the appeal.

This judgment highlights the importance of proper documentation and entry in the relevant registers for claiming credit under RG 23A. It also emphasizes the need for a thorough examination of the circumstances surrounding the error in entry, especially when the goods have been received and used in manufacturing. The decision reaffirms the principle that credit should not be denied solely based on clerical errors if the essential requirements for claiming credit are fulfilled.