Tribunal confirms excise credit addition for job work liability; appeal dismissed for lack of proof

Sunshine Silk Mills P. Ltd. Versus ITO, Ward-4 (3), Surat.

Sunshine Silk Mills P. Ltd. Versus ITO, Ward-4 (3), Surat. - TMI Issues:
Appeal against addition of excise CENVAT credit of Rs. 12,41,027.

Analysis:
1. The assessee appealed against the addition of Rs. 12,41,027 on account of disallowance of excise CENVAT credit. The AO contended that the CENVAT on processed goods was withdrawn from July 2006, and the assessee failed to offer CENVAT credit for taxation. The assessee argued that the credit balance was excise recovered from parties and not required to be paid to the excise department upon license surrender. The AO disallowed the CENVAT credit as income remission, adding it to the total income.

2. The assessee's appeal before the ld.CIT(A) reiterated that the balance was not passed due to oversight since 2005-06. The ld.CIT(A) noted that the CENVAT credit was receivable from the government, not a liability. The processing house used to debit and credit client accounts for excise duty paid and CENVAT credit availed. The ld.CIT(A) found that the liability was not payable to the government but to parties for job work till 2005-06. The appellant failed to establish the liability's existence or payment, leading to the confirmation of the addition.

3. The Tribunal upheld the ld.CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that the CENVAT credit was payable to parties for job work, not the government. The assessee's attempt to misrepresent the liability towards the government was rejected. The Tribunal found no merit in the appeal, as the liability was not proven to be payable. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the addition of Rs. 12,41,027 as income under section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the addition of excise CENVAT credit, emphasizing that the liability was towards parties for job work, not the government. The assessee's failure to prove the liability's existence or payment led to the dismissal of the appeal. The Tribunal concurred with the ld.CIT(A)'s well-reasoned findings, resulting in the confirmation of the addition and the dismissal of the appeal.