Whether endorsed Bill of Entry is a valid document for availing Credit ?

PJ/Case Law/2014-15/2359

Case:- ADVANCED ENZYME TECHNOLOGIES LTD Vs COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, THAN-I

Citation:- 2014-TIOL-438-CESTAT-MUM

Brief facts:-The appeal was directed against Order-in-Appeal No. TH-I/41-42/2011 dated 14/11/2011 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai. Vide the impugned order, the Ld. Lower appellate authority had upheld the denial of Cenvat Credit amounting to Rs.3,12,809/- along with interest thereon and by imposing penalty of Rs.10,000/- on the appellant, M/s. Advanced Enzyme Technologies Ltd.

Appellant’s contentions:-The Ld. Consultant submitted that in this case the appellant imported a consignment of berol powder from Singapore and the import documents for the consignment was filled in the name of the appellant's unit at Pitampur, Indore, which was a unit in SEZ. However, the consignment was meant for the unit at Pali, Shahapur, Dist Thane. The Indore unit endorsed the bill of entry and the consignment was received directly at Thane unit after imports. The only ground for denial for the Cenvat credit was the bill of entry was endorsed in favour of the Thane unit by the Pitampur unit and the endorsed of bill of entry was not a valid document for availing Cenvat Credit under Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. There was no dispute whatsoever about having paid the CVD on the consignment or about receipt of the consignment at Thane unit. It was his contention that the appellant was rightly entitled for the credit on the strength of the endorsed bill of entry since the bill of entry was a specified document for availment of credit. He relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sona Koyo Steering Systems Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi-III, Gurgaon - 2013 (296) ELT 481 (Tri-Del.) = (2014-TIOL-72-CESTAT-DEL), CCE &C, Vadodara-II Vs. Eupec-Welspun Pipe Coatings India Ltd. - 2010 (260) ELT 381 (Guj.) = (2009-TIOL-777-HC-AHM-CX) affirmed by the Apex Court in 2010 (260) ELT A83 (SC). Bando India (P) Ld. Vs. CCE, Delhi-III - 2010 (262) ELT 1103 (Tri-Del) = (2010- TIOL-1679-CESTAT-DEL)and the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of UOI Vs. Marmagoa Steel Ltd. - 2008 (229) ELT 481 (SC) = (2008-TIOL-249-SC-CX). In all these decisions, it had been consistently and uniformly held that Cenvat Credit can be availed on the strength of endorsed bill of entry. Therefore, he pleaded for allowing the appeal.

Respondent’s contentions:-The Ld. AR appearing for the Revenue on the other hand relied on the decision in the case of Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Kanpur - 2000 (116) ELT 364 (Tri) = (2002-TIOL-155-CESTAT-DELLB)wherein the Tribunal had taken a view that endorsed invoice was not a relevant document for availing of credit. Accordingly, he pleaded that availing of credit on the endorsed bill of entry was not permissible in law.

Reasoning of judgment:-In the present case, there was no dispute that the imported consignments had not suffered CVD or the said consignment had not been received at the appellant's premises at Thane. The only dispute was that the bill of entry was endorsed by the Pitampur unit to the Thane unit, since the foreign supplier had indicated the address of the Pitampur unit in the relevant documents. Since bill of entry was a specified document, on the strength of which the Cenvat Credit can be availed, an endorsed bill of entry was also an equally valid document for availing credit. By endorsement only the name of the consignee was changed. This Tribunal in the cases (cited supra) and the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the Eupec-Welspun Pipe Coatings India Ltd. case (cited supra) had held that credit can be availed on the strength of endorsed bill of entry also and the said decision was affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the same case. Thus there was no merit in the Revenue's contention that credit cannot be taken on the strength of endorsed bill of entry.

Impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any, in accordance with law.

Decision:- Appeal allowed.

Comment:- The crux of this case is that endorsed Bill of Entry shall be considered to be a valid document for availing Cenvat Credit and the same is also supported by a number of cases of the Tribunal and even confirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court.

Prepared by: Ranu Dhoot

Comments

PJ/Case Law/2014-15/2359

Post a Comment

Query