2017 (3) TMI 922 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal remands case for invoice verification, highlights need for meticulous excise duty review

The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the matter for the limited purpose of verifying 14 invoices not previously considered, directing the ... CENVAT credit - Polyester textured/twisted yarn (POY) - demand on the ground that POY was received by appellants on fictitious names/invoices without accounting the same - The 14 invoices could not be placed for consideration of the benefit before the adjudicating authority and therefore the benefit of 14 invoices to the time of was not allowed to the appellant - Held that: - verification of 14 invoices which were not considered at the time of second round of remand. In view thereof, remand the matter to the adjudicating authority for the limited purpose of verifying 14 invoices and to give the benefit of credit - appeal allowed by way of remand. Issues:- Verification of credit eligibility on 14 invoices not considered during the second round of remand.Analysis:The case involves a dispute regarding the eligibility of the appellant, a manufacturer of Polyester textured/twisted yarn, for certain benefits related to Central Excise duty. The initial search and subsequent show-cause notice alleged that the appellant received goods on fictitious names/invoices without proper accounting, leading to the wrongful availing of benefits. After multiple rounds of litigation before the Tribunal, it was established that the appellant was entitled to a reduction in demand concerning 59 invoices. However, during the second round of remand, the adjudicating authority failed to consider the benefit with regard to 14 invoices. The appellant contended that these invoices were well-known to the Department and should not have been disallowed. The appellant was willing to provide copies of these invoices for verification. The Tribunal acknowledged the previous ruling on the eligibility of the appellant for credit on the 59 invoices and directed a remand solely for the verification of the 14 invoices not previously considered. It was emphasized that the appellant was not eligible for the SSI benefit for the year 1996-97. The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the matter for the limited purpose of verifying the 14 invoices and considering the benefit of credit on them, with the appellant instructed to pay the remaining balance.This judgment highlights the importance of thorough verification and consideration of all relevant invoices in excise duty matters to ensure the correct application of benefits and duties. The Tribunal's decision to remand the case for the specific purpose of examining the 14 invoices not previously addressed demonstrates the commitment to fair and accurate adjudication based on the facts presented. The acknowledgment of the appellant's ineligibility for a specific benefit for a certain period further clarifies the scope and limitations of the ruling, providing clarity for future proceedings.