9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 1318X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Appellants have taken the Cenvat Credit for the inputs received from their Pune Unit. 2. On 20.03.2003 a Show Cause Notice was issued seeking to deny the Cenvat Credit of Rs.41,73,406/- taken by them during the period April 2000 to May 2002 by invoking the extended period provisions. After due process, the Adjudicating authority dropped the demand after ascertaining the fact that the Excise duty was properly paid by the Pune unit by way of Central Excise invoices and the inputs were received and properly accounted for by the Appellant. However, the department filed an appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals) who has held that the duty paying documents were not available with the Appellant and in the absence of the same the Cenvat Credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unit. We have also perused some of the sample invoices produced by the Ld.Counsel and find that they are all proper invoices raised by M/s. Greaves Ltd. (Pune Unit) clearly showing the details of goods being dispatched, their rates, the value, the Excise duty involved etc. After receiving the goods, the Appellant is making entry by affixing a staff towards packing their goods in their account in RG-23 Part-I and Part-II. A sample invoice is scanned below for ready reference : 8. Therefore, on factual matrix, we find that there is nothing coming on record that the Appellant has contravened the provisions of Rule 57AE of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 or Rule 7 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. 9. We also find that similar issue has been decide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... our. When a levy is not expressly designed by law by a statutory provision, respective Rule which grants credit cannot be presumed to be a charging section by any analogy. 4.4 Following the Apex court judgment cited by the learned Counsel and decisions of Tribunal, we are of the view that Appellant is not liable for recovery sought to be made by the impugned order. 5. In the result the Appeal is allowed and stay petition is disposed. 6. [Order per : C. Satapathy, Member (T)]. - I agree with the order proposed above to allow the stay petition and the appeal for the reason that the word 'purchased' has been used only in the procedural Rule 57AE(3) in the context of maintaining record of inventory whereas there is no such stipu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
