Tribunal requires Revenue to prove non-duty payment for Modvat credit, emphasizing need for specific evidence.

The Tribunal set aside the order disallowing Modvat credit, remanding the matter for verification at the supplier's end to determine if the inputs were non-duty paid. The burden was placed on the Revenue to prove the inputs' duty status, rather than generalizing based on one supplier's statement. The appellants' argument, supported by a Tribunal decision, emphasized the Revenue's obligation to demonstrate non-duty payment. The decision to allow the appeal by remand was contingent on the verification outcome, highlighting the necessity for specific evidence regarding duty payment for each input.

---

---

Issues: Modvat credit disallowance based on duty payment certificate

Analysis:
The issue in this case revolves around the disallowance of Modvat credit amounting to Rs. 1,50,357.24 by the appellants, which was availed as deemed Modvat credit for zinc dross and refined zinc ingot. The disallowance was made on the grounds that the raw materials were not duty paid as per the certificate issued by the supplier. The appellants argued that while the Revenue was able to prove non-duty payment in one procurement instance, this should not be generalized to all suppliers. They contended that the onus is on the Revenue to demonstrate that the inputs received were non-duty paid. The appellants cited a Tribunal decision emphasizing that the burden lies on the Revenue to prove that the manufacturer availed the benefits of the notification and met the conditions for clearance.

Analysis:
The Tribunal, after considering the submissions of the appellants' advocate, agreed with the argument presented. It was noted that a list of suppliers had been provided, indicating that inputs were procured from various manufacturers. The authorities had relied on the statement of one supplier to deny the Modvat credit for all inputs, which was deemed unjustified. The Tribunal emphasized that the Revenue must establish that the inputs received by the appellants were indeed non-duty paid. Consequently, the impugned order disallowing the Modvat credit was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for verification at the supplier's end. The decision on the issue was to be based on the outcome of this verification, allowing the appeal by way of remand.

---