TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CS (P) LTD. [2010 (11) TMI 285 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI], where it was held that Production of photocopies of Bill of Entry by the respondents cannot be held against them - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the dispute is Financial Year 2011-12 to 2014-15. He has further submitted that through Notification No.27/2015/CE(NT) dated 31/12/2015 words were added in Clause (d) in Sub-rule (1) of Rule 9 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, which covered a certificate issued by an authorizer of Custom in respect of goods imported by authorized courier registered with Commissioner of Customs. He has also submitted that under similar circumstances this Tribunal has held that Cenvat credit was admissible to the manufacturer when there was no dispute on receipt of inputs and capital goods on being received and utilized in the manufacture of their final product even when the importer were constrained to use photocopy of the Bill of Entry for the purpose of takin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the above stated case is as follows:- "When the goods are imported through courier, it is not in dispute that the courier agency are permitted to file the Bill of Entry on behalf of the importer-consignee and clear the consignment. When the courier agency has been permitted to file common Bill of Entry on behalf of several importers, obviously all such importers cannot be given original documents. Production of photocopies of Bill of Entry by the respondents cannot be held against them." It was further held as follows:- "Considering the special category of imports and considering that the Customs have prescribed a different procedure, the grounds on which the credit are sought to be denied cannot be sustainable." In view of the finding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|