Cenvat credit claimant must prove actual receipt of inputs; faulty burden analysis led to remand for fresh adjudication.

Entitlement to Cenvat credit required the assessee to prove the foundational facts, including actual receipt of the inputs, by positive evidence; the burden could not be shifted to the Revenue to prove non-receipt. The appellate order was found to rest on an incorrect appreciation of burden and evidence, so it was set aside. The matter was remanded for de novo adjudication by the Assistant Commissioner, leaving the dispute to be decided afresh on the existing legal principles and evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee claiming Cenvat credit had to prove actual receipt of the inputs, and whether the matter should be remanded for de novo adjudication.

Analysis: The claim for credit depended on proof of foundational facts, namely actual receipt of the goods. The burden could not be shifted to the Department to prove non-receipt, since the party seeking the benefit had to establish entitlement by positive evidence. As the appellate order had set aside the adjudication on a faulty appreciation of burden and evidence, the proper course was remand for fresh adjudication rather than outright acceptance or rejection on the existing record.

Conclusion: The appellate order was set aside and the matter was remanded for de novo adjudication by the Assistant Commissioner. The finding on burden of proof was against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The dispute was not finally determined on merits and was sent back for fresh decision in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A claimant to tax credit must prove the foundational facts establishing entitlement, including actual receipt of inputs, and where the original decision is found unsupported by cogent evidence, remand for de novo adjudication is the proper course.

---