Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 756 - AT - Central ExciseIssues Involved: 1. Incorrect demand of central excise duty on a notional basis. 2. Denial of Cenvat credit on photocopies of invoices. 3. Disallowance of Cenvat credit on inputs used in the manufacture of goods lying in stock. 4. Eligibility of credit on sugar cess. Summary: Issue 1: Incorrect demand of central excise duty on a notional basis The Tribunal found that the adjudicating authority erred in calculating the duty liability based on notional figures instead of actual production and clearance data provided by the appellant. The actual figures certified by a Chartered Accountant were available and should have been used. The Tribunal reduced the duty liability by Rs. 2,67,656/-. Issue 2: Denial of Cenvat credit on photocopies of invoices The Tribunal noted that Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 specifies the documents required for availing credit. Although the appellant could not furnish original invoices for some purchases, the receipt and utilization of inputs were not disputed. The Tribunal held that the Commissioner erred in disallowing Cenvat credit based on photocopies of invoices, as the appellant had provided sufficient evidence, including a Chartered Accountant's certificate. Issue 3: Disallowance of Cenvat credit on inputs used in the manufacture of goods lying in stock The Tribunal found that the appellant had an opening stock of 8389 quintals of sugar as on 01.08.2007, which was used in the manufacture of final products. The adjudicating authority's reasoning for denying credit due to the appellant not maintaining an RG 1 Register was rejected. The Tribunal held that the Commissioner erred in ignoring the cogent evidence provided by the appellant, including a Chartered Accountant's certificate. Issue 4: Eligibility of credit on sugar cess The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision to allow Cenvat credit on sugar cess, relying on the Karnataka High Court's decision in Commissioner v. Shree Renuka Sugars Ltd. The Tribunal noted that the decision was not stayed by the Supreme Court and thus remained binding. The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal, which argued that the issue had not attained finality due to a pending appeal before the Supreme Court. Conclusion: The Tribunal modified the impugned order to reduce the duty liability and allow Cenvat credit on photocopies of invoices and inputs in stock. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision to allow credit on sugar cess and dismissed the Department's appeal.
|