9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 619X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... illips India Ltd. (GPI) and taking credit of duty paid on inuts received by them and using them in the manufacture of final products and clearing the goods on payment of duty back to M/s. Godfrey Phillips Ltd. using the credit. (b) In this case, they received a consignment of Hertz flavouring and casing additive , imported by M/s. GPI, directly from the Port, to appellant s premises along with bill of entry and took credit of CVD and education cess paid in respect of the said consignment. It was later noticed that the said bill of entry did not contain necessary endorsement by the Customs officers as envisaged in Board s Circular No. 179/13/96-CX dated 29-2-96. The appellant reversed the Cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 1,52,433/- on 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). He also adds that while bill of entry is a relevant document for the purpose of allowing Cenvat credit but credit cannot be allowed when the bill of entry is not in the name of the appellant as envisaged in the Board s Circular. He also submits that credit taken is irregular and only when the interest was demanded, they have agitated wrong reversal of the credit. 6. I have carefully considered the submissions from both sides. I find that there is no dispute that the imported materials have suffered duty and that they have been received by the appellant in their premises along with the connected bill of entry. There is apparently some procedural mistake in not getting it endorsed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s (India) Ltd. were not endorsed for diversion of the said goods to the appellants manufacturing unit. The duty paid character of the goods in question was never in doubt. In fact, there is a tacit admission on the part of the revenue that the very same goods on which duty was paid by the importer were received in the factory of the manufacturer (appellant). 4. It is well settled that in the absence of any doubt about the duty paid character of the inputs that received in the factory and their utilisation in the manufacture of final products, cleared on payment of duty, the denial of credit on the technical and procedural grounds is not called for. The Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of M/s. Vimal Enterprises v. UOI - 2006 (195 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
