Tribunal overturns denial of Cenvat Credit due to invoice copies error, imposes no penalties

The Tribunal held that the denial of Cenvat Credit based on carbon copies/extra copies of invoices was incorrect. They found that the appellant had now produced the necessary documents, and there was no dispute regarding the receipt and use of duty paid inputs. The Tribunal concluded that the denial of Cenvat Credit and imposition of penalties were unjustified, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues:
Denial of Cenvat Credit based on photocopy/extra copy of invoices.

Analysis:
The appellant, a manufacturer of Power Cables chargeable to Central Excise duty, took Cenvat Credit based on two invoices but could only produce photocopies during an audit. The Jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner confirmed the Cenvat Credit demand, along with interest and penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this decision. The Tribunal directed the appellant to produce original copies of the invoices, and they submitted extra carbon copies in compliance.

The appellant argued that the denial of Cenvat Credit was incorrect as they have now produced the carbon/extra copies of the invoices. They emphasized that the duty paid inputs were received, used in manufacturing, and cleared with appropriate duty payment. They cited relevant judgments to support their case, highlighting that the rules do not specify that Cenvat Credit can only be taken based on original or duplicate copies of invoices.

The Jt. CDR defended the impugned order, stating that Cenvat Credit based on carbon copies/extra copies of invoices is inadmissible. He also noted the lack of supporting evidence or verification by the Jurisdictional superintendent of Central Excise regarding the genuineness of the invoices.

The Tribunal found that the denial of Cenvat Credit based on carbon copies/extra copies of invoices was incorrect. They noted that while previous judgments had disallowed Cenvat Credit based on photocopies, the situation with carbon copies was different. The appellant had now produced extra copies of the invoices, and there was no dispute regarding the receipt and use of duty paid inputs. The Tribunal concluded that the denial of Cenvat Credit and imposition of penalties were unjustified, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal with consequential relief.

---