2014 (9) TMI 630 - AT - Central Excise

Availment of modvat credit - Non receipt of inputs - Held that - As per Rule 57(A) or Rule 57Q of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944. On perusal of the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has discussed the issues in detail including the non-receipt of inputs to the respondent s factory but was directly supplied from the principle supplier to the job workers premises. For better understanding the sequence of movement of inputs from the principal supplier to the job workers - sequence of movements, of inputs from supplier to the job worker and to the respondents, it is seen that they have not received the inputs in their factory but directly supplied from the principal manufacturer to the job workers premises and after the job work is done the goods were returned back to the respondent s factory. As rightly discussed by the lower appellate authority in his order, the appellants raised 57F4 challans to the job workers only after reversing the credit in their books of account and they finally availed the credit only on receipt of the goods from the job workers, and all transactions of movement & receipt are maintained by the respondents. Following decision of Otis Elevator Co. (I) Ltd. CCE, Mumbai 2009 (6) TMI 825 - CESTAT, MUMBAI - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
- Denial of modvat credit on inputs directly supplied to job workers
- Allegations beyond scope of show cause notices
- Compliance with procedural conditions for availing credit

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to three appeals by the Revenue challenging the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The case involves the denial of modvat credit on inputs received by M/s. Hyundai Motors India Ltd. directly at job workers' premises. The Revenue contended that the mandatory procedural conditions for availing credit were not met, emphasizing the importance of payment of duty, receipt of goods in the factory, and usage in final products. They cited a Supreme Court decision to support their stance. However, the respondents argued that the appeals were revenue neutral and raised objections to additional grounds beyond the scope of show cause notices. They highlighted the issuance of challans to job workers only after reversing credit and ultimate credit availed upon goods receipt.

The Tribunal analyzed the sequence of events involving the movement of inputs from the principal supplier to job workers and then to the respondents. It was noted that the goods were not physically received at the factory but directly supplied to job workers, with credit reversal and subsequent availment upon goods receipt. The Tribunal found that all procedural conditions for modvat credit were fulfilled, despite direct supply to job workers. The duty paying documents were in the name of the respondents, and the final receipt of goods was undisputed. The Tribunal differentiated the present case from the cited Supreme Court case, emphasizing the unique circumstances of credit availment on directly supplied inputs.

Referring to precedent cases, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, citing revenue neutrality and the absence of revenue loss. The judgment highlighted that the duty paid nature of the inputs received by the respondents was crucial, ultimately rejecting the Revenue's appeals. The decision aligned with previous Tribunal rulings and confirmed the validity of availing credit on inputs supplied directly to job workers. The judgment was pronounced on 10.09.2014, emphasizing the compliance of the respondents with modvat credit conditions and the rejection of Revenue's appeals.