2017 (11) TMI 645 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT/MODVAT credit - duty paying documents - attested photocopies of the invoices - Held that - the Courts below have failed to follow the directions in the remand order of this Tribunal to verify the fact of duty paid nature of the inputs and their receipt in the factory of production and subject to that, allow the Cenvat credit - it is not disputed that the inputs are of duty paid nature and further they have been duly received and utilised in the factory of production - credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Admissibility of Modvat credit based on attested photocopies of invoices.

Analysis:
The appeal concerned the admissibility of Modvat credit based on attested photocopies of invoices. The Tribunal noted that the dispute revolved around the eligibility of Modvat/Cenvat credit on inputs in the appellant's godown as of a specific date. The appellant had sought permission to store inputs outside the production factory, and the credit was to be taken only upon receipt of all goods related to a particular invoice in the production facility. The Tribunal observed that the lower authorities had not verified whether the inputs in the godown were covered by modvatable invoices. It was emphasized that Modvat credit is permissible only upon actual use of the inputs. The Tribunal directed the lower court to verify the inputs, provide the appellant an opportunity to cooperate, and then make an appropriate decision.

During the verification process post-remand, the appellant produced a certificate from the manufacturer supplier confirming the supply of materials to the appellant. Despite this evidence, the adjudicating authority rejected the claim due to the absence of original documents. The appellant argued that the duty payment, receipt of inputs, and their use in the factory were not in dispute. Reference was made to a Tribunal ruling and a High Court case emphasizing the entitlement to credit on duty-paid inputs if documents are genuine and duty payment is not disputed.

Upon reviewing the contentions and records, the Tribunal found that the denial of Cenvat credit was solely due to the unavailability of original documents. It was acknowledged that the inputs were duty paid, received, and utilized in the production facility. Following the legal precedents cited, the Tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to the Cenvat credit amounting to ?1,07,019.50. Consequently, the appeal by the appellant-assessee was allowed, granting them consequential benefits.