Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2013-14/2026

Importer’s invoice valid document for availing credit.

Case:-JINDAL STEEL & POWER LTD. VERSUS COMMR. OF C.EX. & SERVICE TAX, RAIPUR

Citation:-2013(298) E.L.T. 447 (Tri.-Del.)

Brief Facts:-This appeal is filed by M/s. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., against the Order-in-Appeal No. 36/RPR-I/2012, dated. 27 February, 2012 passed by Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs (Appeals-I).

The brief facts of the case are that the appellants had availed the CENVAT credit amounting to Rs. 9,62,092/- on the goods imported by M/s. ABB Ltd., Bangalore vide bills of entry No. 297005, dated 17-11-2006 and 305232, dated 28-11-2006. These goods were supplied to the appellants by ABB Ltd. on the strength of invoice No. 649020250 and 649020251, both dated 29 November, 2006. The Department has denied the CENVAT credit to the appellants on the ground that the bills of entry are in the names of ABB Ltd. and original of which are not available. Accordingly, the show cause notice was issued to the appellants, which was adjudicated against them by the original authority. Appellants chal­lenged the same before the C.C.E. (Appeals), who also rejected their appeal. Ap­pellants filed this appeal against the impugned order.
 
Appellant Contentions:- The counsel for the appellant submits that they are rightly eligible for credit availment on the strength of importer’s invoice as per Rule 9 and the same should be allowed to them.

Respondent Contentions:-The respondent reiterated the findings of the lower authorities.

Reasoning of Judgment:-Heard both the sides. It is found that the CENVAT credit is denied to the appellants on the ground that the bills of entry are not available in original and are also in the name ABB Ltd. in the absence of which, the appellants are not entitled for CENVAT credit. It is found that under Rule 9, the documents on the basis of which the credit can be allowed are specified. Rule 9(1)(a) of the CENVAT Credit Rules reads as under :-

"Rule 9.Documents and accounts. - (1) The CENVAT credit shall be taken by the manufacturer or the provider of output service or input service distributor, as the case may be, on the basis of any of the following docu­ments, namely :-
(a)        an invoice issued by -
      i.        A manufacturer for clearance of –
                     I.        Inputs or capital goods from his factory or depot or from the premises of the consignment agent of the said manu­facturer or from any other premises from where the goods are sold by or on behalf of the said manufacturer;
                    II.        Inputs or capital goods as such;
     ii.        an importer;
    iii.        an importer from his depot or from the premises of the con­signment agent of the said imports if the said depot or the premises, as the case may be, is registered in terms of the pro­visions of Central Excise Rules, 2002;
    iv.        a first stage dealer or a second stage dealer, as the case may be, in terms of the provisions of Central Excise Rules, 2002; or"

It is found from Rule 9(1)(a)(ii) that any invoice issued by importer is admissible documents for CENVAT credit. In the present case, the appellants are having importer's invoices showing the amount of duty on which they are seeking CENVAT credit. Therefore, there is no reason to deny the CENVAT credit to the appellants on the basis of the importer invoices. As regards second ground of denying credit on ground of delay in taking credit, there is no time-frame men­tioned in the CENVAT Credit Rules in availing the CENVAT credit. Therefore, there is no reason to reject the CENVAT credit on the ground of time also. Ac­cordingly, the Order-in-Appeal is not sustainable and the appeal is allowed.

Decision:-Appeal allowed.

Comment:-The analogy that is drawn from this case is that invoice issued by the importer is a valid document for the purpose of availing cenvat credit and the credit cannot be denied on the ground that original copy of bill of entry was not present. Moreover, it was also confirmed in this case that no time limit is prescribed in the Cenvat Credit Rules for availing the cenvat credit and it can be availed any time after receipt of goods. 

Comments

Post a Comment



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