TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal overturns credit denial due to consumption variation, citing lack of evidence. Appellant's entitlement upheld.</h1> <h3>M/s. Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III</h3> M/s. Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III - 2017 (348) E.L.T. 682 (Tri. - Mumbai) Issues: Denial of cenvat credit based on consumption variation and debit notes issued by principal, absence of physical verification, contention of short receipt/diversion of inputs, dispute over consumption variation reasons.Analysis:1. The appellant, engaged in biscuit manufacturing on job work basis with raw materials supplied by M/s. Britannia Industries Ltd., faced a demand for cenvat credit due to consumption variation noted in debit notes issued by the principal. The department's stance was that this variation implied a shortage of input, justifying the credit denial.2. The appellant's counsel argued that denial was unwarranted as per the job work agreement terms, emphasizing the absence of physical verification to support the claim of non-receipt or diversion of inputs. It was clarified that all supplied quantities were received and utilized, attributing consumption variation to various factors beyond input handling discrepancies.3. The Assistant Commissioner reiterated the department's position, upholding the initial order denying cenvat credit based solely on debit notes without concrete evidence of input mismanagement.4. Upon review, the tribunal found the department's reliance on debit notes insufficient to establish non-receipt or diversion of inputs by the appellant. The appellant had received all inputs from the principal, and the consumption variation, as indicated by debit notes, did not conclusively prove any malpractice.5. Consequently, the tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. The decision highlighted the lack of evidence supporting credit denial, emphasizing the appellant's rightful entitlement to cenvat credit given the absence of proof indicating input mishandling or diversion.6. The judgment, delivered on 27/01/2017, concluded the matter, disposing of the appeal and associated procedural applications in light of the favorable decision for the appellant.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
