Tribunal overturns denial of Cenvat credit on steel wire, granting relief to appellant

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the lower authorities' decision to deny Cenvat credit on steel wire and HB redraw wire. The appellant's explanation regarding the procurement of raw material at a higher price due to shortages was deemed satisfactory. The mismatch in truck numbers on the invoice and GR was considered reasonable by the Tribunal, leading to the conclusion that the denial of credit and duty imposition were unjustified. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appellant was granted relief.

---

---

Issues:
1. Denial of Cenvat credit on steel wire and HB redraw wire due to procurement price exceeding 25% of selling price.
2. Discrepancy in truck numbers on invoice and GR leading to denial of Cenvat credit.

Analysis:
1. The appellant contested the denial of Cenvat credit, arguing that during the impugned period, the average price of finished goods was higher than the cost price, justifying the procurement of raw material at a higher rate. The appellant explained that due to a shortage of raw material, they had to procure it at a higher price. The appellant clarified that the supplier transported goods up to their godown, after which a transporter carried the goods to the appellant's premises in a different truck, causing the mismatch in truck numbers. The appellant's explanation was not considered by the lower authorities. The appellant's counsel emphasized that the procurement of raw material at a higher price should not be a reason to deny Cenvat credit. The Tribunal found the appellant's explanation satisfactory and held that the denial of Cenvat credit was unjustified. Consequently, the impugned order denying Cenvat credit, demanding duty, and imposing penalties was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.

2. The Revenue argued that prudent individuals would not buy raw material at a higher rate than the finished goods and highlighted the discrepancy in the vehicle numbers on the invoice and GR. The Revenue contended that since the raw material's price exceeded 25% of the finished goods' value and the truck numbers did not match, the denial of credit and duty imposition were justified. However, the Tribunal found the appellant's explanation regarding the mismatch in truck numbers reasonable. The Tribunal observed that the appellant's clarification during the investigation was not adequately considered by the lower authorities. As the Revenue failed to provide corroborative evidence supporting the allegations in the show cause notice, the Tribunal held in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeal and granting consequential relief.

---