2019 (4) TMI 1551 - AT - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - duty paying invoices - violation of Rule 3 (1) read with Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - credit denied on the ground that the invoices issued by T. Paul Sons are not backed by manufacturer s invoices - HELD THAT - The Revenue has not brought on record any other evidence to support the ground that the three suppliers of goods to M/s. T. Paul Sons were not manufacturers or have issued such invoices for goods not manufactured by them - there is no reason for denial of the credit - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Disallowance of Cenvat Credit based on invoices from First Stage Dealer
- Imposition of penalties under Cenvat Credit Rules

Analysis:
1. Disallowance of Cenvat Credit based on invoices from First Stage Dealer:
The appellant, a manufacturer of Electro Porcelain Insulators, procured Furnace Oil from a First Stage Dealer, M/s. T. Paul & Sons. The department alleged that the appellant irregularly availed Cenvat Credit based on invoices from the dealer who sourced goods from three manufacturers. The department contended that the appellant violated Rule 3(1) read with Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 by not directly procuring goods from manufacturers. The Adjudicating Authority ordered recovery of credits with interest and imposed penalties. The appellant argued that the suppliers were indeed manufacturers, and proceedings against them were dropped, which was accepted by the Revenue. The Tribunal noted that the invoices were legal and proper as per the Commissioner (Appeals) findings, and no evidence was provided to support the contrary. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal filed by the appellant.

2. Imposition of penalties under Cenvat Credit Rules:
The Revenue contended that penalties imposed by the Adjudicating Authority should have been under Rule 15(1) in addition to Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of the Act. The Revenue argued that the penalties already imposed should be considered as under Rule 15(2). However, the Tribunal found no grounds to disallow the Cenvat Credit, leading to the rejection of the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal's decision was based on the lack of evidence supporting the department's claim that the suppliers did not manufacture the goods or issued invoices for goods not manufactured by them. The Tribunal's ruling emphasized the importance of following the Cenvat Credit Rules while availing credits based on invoices from First Stage Dealers to ensure compliance with the law.