Follow Us :

Case Law Details

Case Name : Arbes Tools P. Ltd. Vs CCEx (CESTAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number : Appeal No. E/1369/10-Mum
Date of Judgement/Order : 08/01/2016
Related Assessment Year :

(Arising out Order-in-Appeal No. YDB/242/M-II/2010 dated 12.05.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai II)

Brief of the case:

  • The CESTAT Mumbai in the case of Arbes Tools P. Ltd. vs. CCEx held that when the admissibility of Cenvat credit is not disputed on legal grounds viz eligibility and duty payment document, then credit cannot be denied merely on technical lapses.
  • Thus, the credit can be allowed even on the basis of photocopy of courier bill of entry.

Facts of the case:

  • The assessee is engaged in the manufacturer of excisable goods viz. encapsulation machine, parts of accessories falling under chapter heading 84798970 and 84799040 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
  • It imported certain components and claimed Cenvat credit of the customs duty portion on the basis of photocopy of courier bill of entry.
  • Adjudicating authority denied the credit claimed on the basis of such courier bill of entry, the order –in-original was also upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals).

Contention of the Assessee:

  • The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue of claiming credit on the basis of photocopy of the documents evidencing payment of duty is well settled by various cases in the favour of assessee.
  • It cited the following decisions decided in the favour of assessee in the assessee:

i) CCE vs. Fusion Electronics P. Ltd. 2011 (264) ELT 513

ii) Controls & Drives Coimbatore P. Ltd. 2008 (222) ELT 470

iii) Macneill Engg. Ltd. 2009 (234) ELT 345

Issue before the CESTAT:

  • Is Cenvat credit admissible on the basis of the photo copy of the document evidencing payment of duty?

Held by CESTAT Mumbai:

  • The objection of department is that credit is not admissible on the basis of photocopy of a document (bill of entry).But it is not in dispute that the material on which the credit has been taken was imported by the appellant and was used for manufacturing of the product.
  • It is well settled position of law that when the assessee is legally entitled to take credit cannot be denied merely on technical grounds more so when assessee makes good the technical lapses by certain other information and explanations.
  • Therefore, the assessee have correctly claimed the CENVAT Credit on the photocopy of the courier bill of entry filed by them and CENVAT Credit cannot be denied on mere technical grounds.
  • In result the appeal of the assessee was allowed.

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
April 2024