2015 (10) TMI 130 - AT - Central Excise

Denial of CENVAT Credit - Bogus invoices - Held that - Order of Commissioner (Appeals) that on the basis of DGCEI investigation several show cause notices were issued to various manufacturers on the similar ground that they have availed cenvat credit only on the basis of invoices issued by M/s. Pranav Metal Mart without receiving the goods. In this connection, Commissioner (Appeals) referred one of the stay order of this Tribunal in respect of other manufacturer. On perusal of the impugned order, I find that he cenvat credit was denied to the appellant on the basis of investigation against M/s. Pranav Metal Mart. Revenue has not raised any objection in respect of the evidences placed for receipt of the goods by the appellant in the nature of payment particulars, transportation of the goods from the dealer s premises to the appellant s factory etc. I find that, in the same situation, the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Monarch Metals Pvt. Limited set-aside the impugned order. - there is no evidence that the appellant had not received the material from the registered dealer - impugned orders are set-aside - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Availing cenvat credit without receiving goods from the registered dealer
- Adjudication of demand of duty, interest, and penalties
- Appeal against the order confirming demand and penalties
- Dispute over receipt of goods based on transport documents
- Comparison with previous case laws and Tribunal orders
- Evaluation of evidence and findings in the present case

Analysis:
1. The appellants were involved in manufacturing Chloride and availing cenvat credit on inputs like Copper Wire rod/ Cathode/ Ingots under Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The issue arose when it was discovered that the appellants availed cenvat credit based on invoices from a registered dealer without actually receiving the goods. A show cause notice was issued proposing demand of duty, interest, and penalties, which were confirmed by the adjudicating authority. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal of the appellants but reduced the penalty imposed on one of the partners.

2. The Advocate for the appellants argued that they did receive the goods from the registered dealer, supported by evidence like transport documents and payment details. This evidence was not disputed by the department. Reference was made to previous cases where similar issues were resolved in favor of the appellants. On the other hand, the Authorised Representative for the Revenue contended that the present case had distinct features, including discrepancies in transport documents.

3. Upon review, the Judge found that several show cause notices were issued to different manufacturers on similar grounds of availing cenvat credit without receiving goods based on invoices from the same dealer. The Judge noted that the denial of cenvat credit was solely based on the investigation against the dealer, with no objections raised by the Revenue regarding the evidence presented by the appellants. Referring to a previous Tribunal order, the Judge highlighted the importance of corroborative evidence and the need to consider all available documentation.

4. The Judge emphasized that in the absence of evidence proving non-receipt of goods by the appellants, the case laws cited by the appellants were applicable and favored their position. The Judge ultimately set aside the impugned orders, allowing both appeals filed by the appellants and granting consequential relief. The decision was based on the lack of evidence indicating non-receipt of goods and the precedents supporting the appellants' claims.

Conclusion:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD addressed the issue of availing cenvat credit without receiving goods from a registered dealer, analyzing the evidence presented by both parties and comparing the case with relevant legal precedents. The decision favored the appellants, setting aside the orders confirming demand and penalties, and allowing the appeals with consequential relief.