Rebate claim on bogus invoices partly fails, while the unexamined balance requires fresh adjudication with natural justice.

Rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was not allowable to the extent it was based on Cenvat credit taken on bogus invoices issued by a non-existent supplier, because the receipt and use of the inputs in the exported goods were not established. The segregable balance claim, however, had not been examined and no reason was recorded for its denial, so that portion required fresh adjudication on remand with observance of natural justice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the entire rebate claim could be rejected on the ground that a part of the Cenvat credit had been taken on bogus invoices, and whether the balance claim required fresh consideration.

Analysis: The claim for rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was found unsustainable to the extent it rested on credit taken on invoices issued by a non-existent supplier, as the inputs were not established to have been received in the factory or used in the exported goods. At the same time, the authorities did not examine the portion of the rebate claim stated to be unrelated to the disputed credit, and no reason was recorded for denying that segregable amount. The matter therefore required fresh adjudication limited to the balance claim, with observance of natural justice.

Conclusion: The rebate claim was rejected insofar as it related to credit based on bogus invoices, but the claim for the balance amount was remanded for de novo consideration.

Final Conclusion: The revision was disposed of by affirming the rejection of the tainted portion of the rebate claim and sending the remaining portion back for fresh decision.

---