2010 (4) TMI 485 - AT - Central Excise

Cenvat/Modvat - documents for taking credit - The appellant imported the impugned goods and took credit on the basis of triplicate copy of bill of entry generated on EDI system. The original authority in pursuance of the show cause notice denied the credit holding that in terms of Rule 57G(3)(k), the credit can be taken only on the basis of duplicate copy of bill of entry generated on Electronic Data Interchange System installed in the Customs or Central Excise Commissionerate. The said order has been upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). Held that - in the light of the decision of India Cements Ltd. v. C.C.E 2008 -TMI - 54885 - CESTAT, SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, CHENNAI, appellant have bought duty paid imported goods and used the same in the factory for manufacture. Appellant is eligible for credit.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against denial of credit based on triplicate copy of bill of entry generated on EDI system.

Analysis:
The appellant imported goods and claimed credit based on triplicate copy of bill of entry from the EDI system. The original authority and Commissioner (Appeals) denied the credit, citing Rule 57G(3)(k) which specifies credit can only be taken on the duplicate copy of bill of entry generated on the Electronic Data Interchange System. The appellant argued that Rule 57G(3)(c) mentions "triplicate copy of bill of entry" without specifying it to be from a manual system only. They referred to a Circular by the Board allowing credit on duplicate copy of bill of entry from the EDI system due to inconsistencies in generating triplicate copies. The appellant also cited a Tribunal decision supporting their claim.

The Department argued that Rule 57G distinguishes between triplicate copy under sub-rule (3)(c) and duplicate copy from the EDI system under sub-rule (3)(k), implying triplicate copy should be from a manual system. They contended that the prescribed document must be produced to claim credit.

The Tribunal noted the Circular highlighting inconsistencies in generating triplicate copies, leading to including duplicate copies from the EDI system for credit without amending the rule. They found merit in the appellant's argument, supported by the Tribunal decision in a similar case. As the appellant used the imported goods in manufacturing without dispute, they were deemed eligible for credit. Consequently, the appeal was allowed with appropriate relief in accordance with the law.