CENVAT credit on bogus invoices denied where actual receipt and use of goods in manufacture were not proved.

CENVAT credit claimed on allegedly bogus invoices and transport documents was denied because the assessee failed to prove actual receipt of goods and their consumption in manufacture. The dealer had no manufacturing facility or godown and admitted the transactions were bogus, while the appellant also failed after remand to discharge the factual burden of establishing genuineness. On these concurrent findings, no substantial question of law arose and the denial of credit was left undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to CENVAT credit on the basis of alleged purchases supported by invoices and whether, on the facts found, any substantial question of law arose for consideration.

Analysis: The disputed credit was founded on GR receipts and documents found to be bogus and fabricated. The dealer from whom the goods were shown to have been purchased had no manufacturing facility or godown and had admitted the bogus nature of the transactions. After remand, the appellant failed to establish that the goods were actually received and consumed in manufacture. In these circumstances, the factual burden cast on the appellant to prove genuineness of the transactions was not discharged, and the concurrent findings below called for no interference.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to the disputed CENVAT credit, and no substantial question of law arose.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the denial of CENVAT credit failed on the merits, leaving the revenue's adjudication undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where credit is claimed on the basis of allegedly bogus transport and invoice documents, the assessee must prove actual receipt and use of goods in manufacture; failure to discharge that burden justifies denial of credit and does not raise a substantial question of law.

---