Praveen Singh Corporate Updates

BILL OF ENTRY IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT THE ENDORSEMENT OF PROPER OFFICE OF CUSTOMS IS A VALID DOCUMENT FOR AVAILING CENVAT CREDIT- ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

This is a Central Excise Appeal under Section 35-G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the order passed by the Tribunal dated 01^st July, 2011 for the period of 2008.

In the present case, M/S International Tobacco Co. Ltd., (herein referred to as the “Assessee” or “Manufacturer”) imported capital goods, which were in the nature of machine. The said machine had been brought in the name of M/s Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. and Assessee took CENVAT Credit on the same. Thereafter, the aforesaid machines were diverted to the Assessee premises. The Department in appeal alleged that the said diversion was made in violation of Rule 9 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.

Earlier, the Tribunal in his order held that Assessee had not made any violation under Rule 9 of the CENVAT Credit Rules since there was no dispute about the duty paid on the capital goods and receipt of same by the Assessee and used also for its own internal purposes.

Learned counsel for the Assessee has argued that the requirements of Rule 9(2) were fully satisfied in the matter of Assessee.

Rule 9(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 has been reproduced as under:

"9(2)-No CENVAT credit under sub-rule (1) shall be taken unless all the particulars as prescribed under the Central Excise Rules, 2002 or the Service Tax Rules, 1994, as the case may be, are contained in the said document.

Provided that if the said document does not contain all the particulars but contains the

• Details of duty or service tax payable,
• Description of the goods or taxable service [Assessable value, Central Excise or Service tax registration number of the person issuing the invoice, as the case may be,]
• Name and address of the factory or warehouse or premises of first or second stage dealers or [provider of output service], and
• The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise or the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, as the case may be, is satisfied that the goods or services covered by the said document have been received and accounted for in the books of the account of the receiver, he may allow the CENVAT credit.]

After hearing both the parties, the division bench upheld the order of the Tribunal.

And Accordingly dismissed the appeal of the Department.