2015 (5) TMI 200 - AT - Central Excise

Availment of irregular CENVAT Credit by the job worker - Invoices in name of other person i.e. Principal manufacturer - Held that - Bill of entry is also a valid document for availment of cenvat credit. I also find that the issue is squarely covered on all fours by the ruling of this Tribunal in the case of Advance Enzyme Technologies (2014 (3) TMI 751 - CESTAT MUMBAI). Thus the appeal is allowed and the impugned order set aside - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Availment of cenvat credit on inputs not in the name of the appellant.
2. Contravention of provisions of Rule 9(1)(a) and 9(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.
3. Recovery of irregular credit under Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules read with Section 11A of the Central Excise Act.
4. Appeal against order-in-appeal confirming demand of cenvat credit and penalty under Section 11AC.

Analysis:
Issue 1: The appellant availed cenvat credit on inputs not in their name. The Revenue authority alleged contravention of rules and issued a show cause notice for recovery. The appellant claimed they were manufacturing goods as a job worker for another entity, who provided inputs. The disputed bills of entry were received by the appellant and used in manufacturing dutiable products. The appellant argued that the bill of entry is a specified document for credit under Rule 9(1) and cited relevant legal precedents to support their case.

Issue 2: The show cause notice was adjudicated, confirming the demand and imposing penalties under Section 11AC and Rule 15A of the Cenvat Credit Rules. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the demand and penalty under Section 11AC but dropped the penalty under Rule 15A. The appellant appealed to the Tribunal challenging the decision.

Issue 3: The appellant's consultant reiterated grounds before the authorities and cited a Tribunal ruling supporting their position. The Tribunal considered various legal rulings, including the validity of the bill of entry for availing cenvat credit. The Tribunal found the bill of entry to be a valid document for credit availment, in line with previous judgments, and allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order.

Issue 4: The Tribunal, after hearing both sides, concluded that the bill of entry is a valid document for cenvat credit availment. Citing precedent and the specific circumstances of the case, the Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeal and granting consequential benefits as per the law.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues involved, the arguments presented by the parties, the legal framework applied, and the final decision rendered by the Tribunal.