2025 (1) TMI 349 - AT - Service Tax

Denial of CENVAT Credit for the reason that the assessee-Appellant herein did not produce the original documents in support of its claim - HELD THAT - The Appellant has given a plausible reason for non-production of original documents before the Commissioner, which is not suspected. Hence, at the outset, the reasons indicated by the Appellant appears to be bona fide. Further, the denial of Credit has been made only for the reason of non-production of the documents, which was clearly beyond the control of the appellant. Hence, it would meet the ends of justice if an opportunity is given, by setting aside the order, thereby directing the Appellant to go before the Commissioner/Adjudicating authority before whom the Appellant shall furnish all relevant documents to the satisfaction of the said authority; the said authority shall cause verification of the same and if satisfied, then consider allowing the claim of CENVAT Credit after following the process of law. But in any case, since the issue pertains to the year 2014, it is deemed appropriate to direct the Appellant to co-operate with the Authority without seeking any unnecessary adjournments and thereby enable the said Authority to pass a speaking order after considering the documents that may be furnished before him, within a period of 30 days from the date of the receipt of this Order. All the contentions insofar as the present issue is concerned, are left open. Conclusion - The denial of Credit has been made only for the reason of non-production of the documents, which was clearly beyond the control of the appellant. Hence, it would meet the ends of justice if an opportunity is given, by setting aside the order, thereby directing the Appellant to go before the Commissioner/Adjudicating authority. Appeal disposed off by way of remand.

Summary

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai, comprising Hon'ble Mr. P. Dinesha and Hon'ble Mr. M. Ajit Kumar, addressed the issue of whether the Commissioner was justified in denying the CENVAT Credit to the assessee due to the non-production of original documents. The appellant, represented by Shri S. Murugappan, argued that the documents were destroyed in the Thane cyclone and have since been recovered, requesting an opportunity to present them to the Original Authority. The respondent, represented by Shri Sanjay Kakkar, opposed this, citing the ten-year lapse since the original claim.

The Tribunal found the appellant's reason for non-production of documents to be bona fide and determined that justice would be served by allowing the appellant to present the documents to the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, remanding the case to the Commissioner for verification of the documents. The appellant was directed to cooperate with the Authority and avoid unnecessary delays, with a resolution expected within 30 days from receipt of the order. The appeal was disposed of by remand, leaving all contentions open.