2012 (12) TMI 677 - AT - Central Excise

Appeal dismissed due to lack of evidence for cenvat credit on input invoices.

Anu Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise

Anu Industries Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise - TMI Issues:- Availment of cenvat credit without physical arrival of inputs- Implication of statements from suppliers- Examination of evidence and findingsAnalysis:The appellant appealed against an order upholding the disallowance of cenvat credit amounting to Rs. 79,140 due to the lack of proof of physical arrival of inputs based on specific invoices. The appellant failed to demonstrate the receipt of inputs in the factory or their use in manufacturing, leading to the confirmation of the disallowance in the first appeal.In the second appeal, the appellant contended that the statement of the proprietor of one of the supplying companies did not implicate them, emphasizing that payments for the inputs were made, justifying the cenvat credit claim. However, the Departmental Representative supported the lower authorities' decision.The records indicated that the appellant, engaged in manufacturing automobile parts, claimed credit based on invoices from various suppliers. Statements from suppliers revealed that invoices were issued without actual supply of inputs to the appellant, as corroborated by the adjudication order.The adjudicating authority, after examining the evidence, concluded that only invoices were received, and no physical inputs reached the appellant's factory. The absence of contradictory evidence and failure to refute the evidence gathered from the suppliers led to the unchallenged finding that the goods did not physically arrive at the destination or enter the manufacturing process. Consequently, the first appellate authority's decision remained unaltered, and the appeal was dismissed.