Appellant entitled to Cenvat credit on endorsed bill of entry under Rule 9(1)

The Tribunal held that the appellant is entitled to avail cenvat credit against the endorsed bill of entry as a valid document under Rule 9(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Relying on precedent and arguments presented, the Tribunal set aside the previous order, allowing the appeals in favor of the appellant. The judgment was delivered on 22.12.2015 by the Tribunal member.

---

---

Issues:
- Validity of availing cenvat credit against endorsed bill of entry under Rule 9(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

Analysis:
The appeals were directed against an order-in-appeal upholding an order-in-original regarding the appellant's entitlement to cenvat credit against endorsed bill of entry for imported materials. The appellant, a manufacturer of excisable goods, received materials through an associated company and availed cenvat credit. The lower excise authorities disputed the credit, leading to show cause notices and subsequent confirmation of demand, interest, and penalty. The appellant argued that the endorsed bill of entry is a valid document under Rule 9(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, citing relevant judgments. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order-in-original, prompting the appeals before the Tribunal.

The appellant contended that the status of a bill of entry remains unchanged after endorsement and that Rule 9(1)(c) does not specify that a bill of entry must not be endorsed to avail cenvat credit. The appellant received the inputs, discharged duty liability, and the entire consignment was transferred to them, justifying the endorsement. The Tribunal considered the arguments and cited the case of Akzo Nobel Coatings (India) Ltd. vs. CCE, Bangalore, where the Tribunal allowed cenvat credit based on endorsed bills of entry. The Tribunal noted that the Department had no evidence to deny credit based on the endorsed bill of entry, emphasizing the receipt and utilization of imported goods for manufacturing excisable products.

After analyzing the precedents and arguments, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant is entitled to cenvat credit against the endorsed bill of entry as a valid document for availing credit. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeals in favor of the appellant. The judgment was pronounced on 22.12.2015 by the Tribunal member.

---