Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether Cenvat credit availed on the basis of dealer invoices was admissible when the Revenue established, on circumstantial evidence, that the goods were not received and the transport particulars in the invoices were false.
Analysis: Cenvat credit under the relevant rules is available only when the inputs are received in the factory and the credit documents contain valid particulars. The burden of proving admissibility rests on the assessee. The invoices issued under the excise scheme also operate as transport documents, and where the vehicle particulars are found to be untrue and no supporting evidence such as GRNs, gate entries, or inward records is produced, the genuineness of the transactions stands displaced. Applying the standard of preponderance of probabilities, the evidence that the alleged transporter was a dummy and that many vehicle numbers were non-existent or incapable of carrying the goods was sufficient to show that the goods were not received against the invoices.
Conclusion: The Cenvat credit was not admissible and the demand was sustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: Cenvat credit cannot be allowed on invoices alone when the assessee fails to prove receipt of goods and the documentary particulars supporting the credit are shown to be false or unreliable; the burden of establishing entitlement to credit lies on the recipient.