2015 (10) TMI 1348 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal Remands Appeal for CENVAT Credit Verification

M/s Interkiln Ceramics Ltd Versus Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Ahmedabad-III

The Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, directing the Adjudicating authority to verify a certificate obtained by the Appellant and decide the ... Denial of CENVAT Credit - Held that:- Assessee has produced the documents in respect of two Bills of Entry before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Adjudication order was modified to that extent and the CENVAT Credit was denied to ₹ 6,88,010.00 along with interest and penalty. He fairly submits that after passing of the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals), they obtained a certificate in lieu of lost / misplaced/ destroyed/ mutilated Bill of Entry dt.25.06.2011 from the Customs authorities. He drew the attention of the Bench to the said certificate. I find that the Appellant received a certificate in respect of Bills of Entry to the amount of ₹ 6,88,010.00. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:1. Denial of CENVAT Credit2. Remand to Adjudicating Authority3. Verification of Certificate4. Opportunity of HearingAnalysis:1. The judgment addresses the issue of denial of CENVAT Credit amounting to Rs. 31,49,444.00 by the Adjudicating authority. The Appellant produced documents for two Bills of Entry before the Commissioner (Appeals), resulting in a modification of the Adjudication order, denying CENVAT Credit only to the extent of Rs. 6,88,010.00 along with interest and penalty. Subsequently, the Appellant obtained a certificate from Customs authorities in lieu of lost Bills of Entry. The Tribunal considered this certificate and remanded the matter to the Adjudicating authority for verification, allowing the appeal by way of remand.2. The Tribunal noted that the Adjudicating authority had confirmed the denial of CENVAT Credit initially. However, with the production of documents and the subsequent certificate obtained by the Appellant, the matter required further examination. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the Adjudicating authority to verify the certificate provided by the Appellant and to decide the matter afresh. It emphasized the importance of providing a proper opportunity of hearing before reaching a decision in this case.3. The judgment highlights the significance of the certificate obtained by the Appellant in relation to the Bills of Entry, amounting to Rs. 6,88,010.00. This certificate played a crucial role in the Tribunal's decision to remand the matter for verification by the Adjudicating authority. By allowing the appeal by way of remand, the Tribunal ensured that the Adjudicating authority would re-examine the case in light of the new evidence presented by the Appellant, emphasizing the need for a fair opportunity of hearing during the process.4. In conclusion, the judgment underscores the procedural aspect of providing a fair opportunity of hearing to parties involved in such cases. By remanding the matter for verification of the certificate and a fresh decision by the Adjudicating authority, the Tribunal upheld the principles of natural justice and due process. This comprehensive analysis of the issues involved in the judgment demonstrates the meticulous consideration given to the legal and factual aspects of the case, ensuring a just and equitable resolution through the appellate process.