Denial of credit due to missing of certain details in Invoice

PJ/Case Laws/2011-12/1575

Case: - UNION OF INDIA THROUGH COMMISSIONER CENTRAL ESCISE AND CUSTOMS, RAIPUR V/S M/S BHARAT ALUMINIUM CO LTD, KORBA.

Citation: -2010-TIOL-744-HC-CHATTISGARH.

Issue:- Whether Modvat credit can be denied on the ground that the invoice did not contain some particulars when duty payment and utilisation of input not in doubt?

BRIEF FACTS: - The issue involved in the above case was that the respondent availed input Modvat credit amounting to Rs 22, 81,835 and Rs 30, 57,032 on the strength of invoices issued by the bharat petroleum corporations ltd during the months of November 1995, September 1995 and January 1996. Eight show cause notices were issued by the revenue for disallowing the Modvat credit on the ground detailed in the notices, and the adjudicating authority disallowed credit amounting Rs 15,67,942 on the invoices dated 6.8.1995 , 10.6.1995, 9.7.1995 and Rs 6,74,209 on the invoices dated 29.6.1995 and imposed penalty of Rs 1,00,000 and Rs 15,000 respectively. On the basis of various decisions of the Supreme Court it was argued that no credit can be denied on the ground of particulars which do not form part of the show cause notices. It was also argued that the inputs on which the respondent claimed the Modvat credit was not used in the manufacture of ultimate dutiable final goods.

APPELLANTS CONTENTION: - The appellant contended that the tribunal has passed the impugned order on the basis of the amendment in the rule 57g and in the view of the circular dated 22.3.1999 issued by the central board of customs and excise. On verification of the documents it was found that the supplier (respondent) did not submit the subject invoices along with their monthly return and the details of the goods received and sold were not entered in registered.

RESPONDENTS CONTENTION:- The respondent contended that Modvat credit was held to be inadmissible only on the ground of procedural lapses on the part of input supplier. There was no dispute regarding payment of duty on the inputs and its utilization in the manufacture of final product by the respondent.

REASONING OF JUDGEMENT:- In this case there is no dispute regarding duty payment and goods used in the final products. Therefore, in view of the amendment made in Rule 57G of rules which is applicable to the pending cases and in view of the board circulars, the impugned order is set aside and the appeals are allowed.

DECISION: - The case was decided in the favour of assessee and against the revenue and thus the appeal was dismissed.

Comments

PJ/Case Laws/2011-12/1575

Post a Comment

Query