Cenvat credit on test samples requires proof of use in manufacture; penalty must remain proportionate to the contravention.

Cenvat/Modvat credit on copper concentrate test samples is admissible only when documentary evidence shows that the samples were used in or in relation to manufacture. The Tribunal found no proof that the tested samples formed part of the manufacturing process, as the asserted testing necessity was not supported by the manufacturing write-up or records showing movement from the laboratory to the plant, so credit was denied. On penalty, the Tribunal considered the contravention limited to a negligible quantity and noted voluntary reversal of credit on the larger portion of samples tested outside the factory, so the penalty was reduced as disproportionate.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether Modvat/Cenvat credit was admissible on copper concentrate samples drawn and tested in the assessee's laboratory before being used in manufacture. (ii) Whether the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 called for interference.

Issue (i): Whether Modvat/Cenvat credit was admissible on copper concentrate samples drawn and tested in the assessee's laboratory before being used in manufacture.

Analysis: The test samples were held not to have been shown, by documentary evidence, to have been used in or in relation to the manufacture of copper anodes. The asserted necessity of testing for moisture content was not supported by the manufacturing write-up or by a maintenance register showing movement of tested samples from the laboratory to the manufacturing plant. The Tribunal distinguished the cited decisions because, unlike those cases, no statutory testing requirement or essential pre-requisite for manufacture was established here.

Conclusion: Credit on the test samples was not admissible and the disallowance was upheld.

Issue (ii): Whether the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944 called for interference.

Analysis: The credit was taken on a negligibly small quantity of imported raw material, and the assessee had voluntarily reversed the credit on the larger portion of samples tested outside the factory. In these circumstances, maximum penalty was considered unwarranted and a lesser penalty was found appropriate.

Conclusion: The penalty was reduced to Rs. 5,000.

Final Conclusion: The denial of input-duty credit was sustained, but the penalty was substantially reduced, resulting in only partial relief to the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Cenvat or Modvat credit on input samples is allowable only when their use in or in relation to manufacture is established by evidence, and penalty must be proportionate to the nature and extent of the contravention.

---