Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Laws/2011-12/1574

Admissibility of Cenvat Credit on Inputs - For reduction in price credit note issued

CASE: COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, SURAT V/S. TRINETRA TEXTURISERS PVT. LTD.             

CITATION: 2004 (166) E.L.T. 384 (Tri-MUMBAI)
 
ISSUE:- Procurement of Inputs - Credit note issued by input supplier due to reduction in price – admissibility of cenvat credit
 
BRIEF FACTS:The facts in brief are that the respondents had taken Modvat credit on the basis of duty paying documents received from their suppliers. Subsequently, the suppliers had issued credit notes in favour of the respondents at the rate of Rs. 2/- per kg. On noticing this fact, the departmental authorities have coerced the respondents to debit the input credit amount equivalent to the duty reduction consequent to value reduction on the inputs, which occurred consequent to such credit notes. The respondents, complying with these directions, did reverse the corresponding amounts, as directed. There was no correction in the duty paying documents requiring the said correction in the credit amount. Therefore, the respondents suo moto took credit of the reversed amount. Proceedings through show cause notices were initiated against the respondents by alleging that the respondents cannot re-credit the Modvat amount suo moto, because there is no corresponding duty paying documents to entitle the claim of this suo moto credit. The respondents succeeded before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Revenue’s instant appeals against the common order are directed against the relief granted by the Commissioner (Appeals).
 
APPELLANTS CONTENTION:It has been claimed that there is no provision to take credit on the basis of credit notes issued by the suppliers towards the inputs supplied. In the absence of duty paying documents to support such credit, the impugned order-in-appeal may be set aside.
 
REASONING OF JUDGEMENT: The effect of the credit note is that the purchaser has received the input at a cheaper price equivalent to the amount of credit note. Whether on account of issue of such credit notes, the assessable value of the input had to be scaled down and whether on such scaling down, the duty that has been paid by the supplier, as reflected in the invoices and the other statutory records of the supplier, has to be scaled down or not is a matter that has to be determined by the Central Excise authorities in charge of the suppliers unit. There is no evidence on record to suggest that such exercise was in fact carried out and such a duty reduction in respect of the consignments received by the respondents has actually occurred and the corresponding duty paying documents had been corrected. This having not been done, the entire exercise at the end of the purchaser factory for cutting down the credit, was without the authority of law. It has not been demonstrated in the appeal as to how the original exercise of pruning down the credit amount is supported by the provisions of the law. It is well settled legal position that the Central Excise authorities in charge of factories receiving inputs, have no jurisdiction to re-assess the duty on inputs received [Kerala State Electronic Corpn. v. CCE, Kochi - 1996 (84) E.L.T. 44 (Tribunal)]. The illegal and coercive reversal of credit on one hand, at the same time claiming that the respondents lack the authority to suo moto claim back the said credit on the other hand, tantamount to adding insult to injury. The approach also shows that, instead of correcting the illegality omitted by the department, the departmental authorities, by filing these instant appeals, are attempting to perpetuate this illegality, which cannot be supported. Besides the basic ground in the appeal that the respondents have taken a suo moto credit itself is a misstatement inasmuch as the credit taken was only to restore the actual credit available on the basis of duty paying documents and there was no effort to take credit in excess of the credit mentioned in the duty paying documents
 
DECISION:- Appeal rejected.

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com