2024 (1) TMI 300 - HC - Central Excise

CENVAT Credit - credit allowed on photocopies of invoices - valid document as envisaged under rule 9 of CENVAT credit rules, 2004 or not - CENVAT credit allowed despite ISD registration not having been obtained prior to seeking to avail CENVAT credit - HELD THAT - From the factual findings recorded by the Tribunal, it can be seen that the respondent-assessee had availed the Cenvat credit on the basis of the statement provided by the Head Office after procuring the goods and services and accordingly, the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that such Canvet credit availed by the respondent cannot be denied. There are no reason to interfere with the impugned order as no question of law much less any substantial question of law arises - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are:
1. Whether the order of the Tribunal permitting CENVAT credit despite photocopies of invoices not being considered valid documents as per Rule 9 of CENVAT credit rules, 2004?
2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in allowing CENVAT credit even though ISD registration was not obtained prior to seeking to avail CENVAT credit?

Issue 1:
The appellant Revenue Department raised substantial questions of law regarding the validity of CENVAT credit availed by the respondent based on photocopies of invoices. The respondent, engaged in manufacturing goods, was distributing CENVAT Credit from its Head Office without obtaining ISD registration. The Tribunal held that the credit was admissible as the Head Office had original invoices and the credit was distributed to the appellant unit. The Tribunal emphasized that substantial benefits like CENVAT Credit should not be denied due to procedural infractions.

Issue 2:
Regarding the second issue of ISD registration, the Tribunal relied on various judgments to conclude that non-obtaining ISD registration does not disentitle the assessee from availing CENVAT credit. The Tribunal found that even if there was a lapse in obtaining registration, the credit passed by the Head Office could not be denied to the respondent. The Tribunal highlighted that the original invoices were with the Head Office, and there was no evidence of the credit being availed by another unit of the respondent.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal based on the factual findings and the Tribunal's decision, stating that no question of law or substantial question of law arose. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to allow the CENVAT credit to the respondent.