2024 (5) TMI 992 - AT - Central Excise

Wrongful availment of CENVAT Credit - appellant did not produce the input tax invoices for verification at the time of audit - HELD THAT - It is found from the orders passed by the lower authorities that the cenvat credit has been denied to the appellant on the sole reason that the input service invoices were not produced by the appellant for verification during the audit and when these invoices were produced by the appellant before the Adjudicating Authority, instead of considering the same, he sent the invoices to the jurisdictional Division Office for verification and disallowed the credit relying on the verification report of the Divisional Office. The Commissioner (Appeals) ought to have remanded the matter in entirety and should not have bifurcated the amount when according to the appellant it is on the same footing. Learned counsel for the appellant has prayed that the dispute in the present appeal relating to the amount of Rs.10,02,461/-should also be remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to be considered de novo in the light of the documents specially the invoices to be placed on the record. The proper course would be to remand the matter in respect of the present issue to the Adjudicating Authority to be considered on merits. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved:
Challenge to Order-in-Appeal regarding wrongly availed cenvat credit.
1. Background: The appellant, engaged in manufacturing Signalling Relay, challenged Order-in-Appeal upholding demand of wrongly availed cenvat credit of Rs.10,02,461/- for March 2017.
2. Show Cause Notices: Two show cause notices issued for different periods demanding sums on grounds of non-production of input tax invoices during audit. Adjudication disallowed cenvat credit on Input Service Distributor (ISD) invoices, leading to imposition of penalties.
3. Appellant's Contentions: Appellant argued that Commissioner should have verified available invoices instead of relying on Divisional Officer's report. Claimed credit disallowed improperly, especially ISD invoices.
4. Appellate Tribunal's Decision: Tribunal noted denial of credit due to non-production of invoices during audit. Recommended remand to Adjudicating Authority for fresh consideration based on documents provided.
5. Remand Order: Tribunal remanded the matter for full consideration, rejecting bifurcation of the amount. Appellant's request for remand to Adjudicating Authority was accepted.
6. Limitation Issue: Appellant raised limitation issue, citing precedent. Tribunal set aside impugned order, allowing appeal by way of remand for fresh consideration, including the limitation issue.
7. Conclusion: The Tribunal's decision on remand for reevaluation by the Adjudicating Authority was pronounced on 21st May, 2024.