Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether CENVAT credit could be denied merely because the respondent relied on a xerox copy of the bill of entry instead of the original document under Rule 9(1)(c) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
Analysis: The respondent established that the goods were received, duty had been paid, and the inputs were used in the manufacture of final products. The respondent also attempted to obtain a certified copy of the bill of entry, but the request was declined. In such circumstances, the lower appellate authority invoked the discretion available under Rule 9(2) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 and treated the lapse as a technical one. The reasoning accepted that where the substantive entitlement is otherwise shown and the document is unavailable despite bona fide to secure it, credit should not be defeated mechanically on the basis of the form of the supporting document.
Conclusion: CENVAT credit could not be denied on the sole ground that the bill of entry produced was a xerox copy; the respondent was entitled to the credit.
Ratio Decidendi: Where receipt of duty-paid goods and their use in manufacture are not in dispute, CENVAT credit cannot be rejected merely for a technical defect in the supporting document if the assessee has bona fide sought the proper document and the statute permits allowance on satisfaction of the authority.