2018 (10) TMI 7 - AT - Central Excise

Appellant granted credit for cenvat based on photocopy of bill of entry

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the cenvat credit based on the photocopy of the consolidated bill of entry. The decision was made ... CEVAT Credit - duty paying invoices - credit availed on the basis of Photocopy of invoices is denied - Held that:- The identical issue has been considered by the Tribunal in the case of M/s Fusion Electronics (P) Ltd. [2010 (11) TMI 285 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] where the Tribunal while allowing such credit held that Production of photocopies of bill of entry by the respondents cannot be held against them - credit allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:- Denial of cenvat credit based on photocopy of consolidated bill of entry- Allowability of cenvat credit in absence of original bill of entryAnalysis:The appellant, engaged in manufacturing paper products, imported consignments through a courier company, which filed a consolidated bill of entry covering various importers. The appellant, having received only a photocopy of the bill of entry, availed cenvat credit based on it. However, the department objected to the credit due to the absence of original documents in the appellant's favor. Both lower authorities denied the credit, leading to the present appeal. The appellant argued that the imports were genuine, with supporting documentation proving receipt and utilization of components in their factory. The appellant cited precedents where cenvat credit was allowed for common bill of entries.The Revenue, however, opposed the appellant's arguments, referring to a Circular stating that separate bill of entries should be filed for imports via courier. The Commissioner (Appeals) had relied on Supreme Court rulings to deny the credit. The Tribunal observed that the appellant procured components through the courier import route, with bills of entry filed in a consolidated manner by the courier company. Since the appellant only had a photocopy of the bill of entry, with the original held by the courier company, the issue was whether cenvat credit could be allowed without the original bill of entry. Citing a precedent where similar credit was allowed, the Tribunal emphasized that the Customs procedure for courier imports allowed the courier agency to file a common bill of entry on behalf of multiple importers, making original documents unfeasible for each importer. Thus, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, following the precedent's rationale.In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the cenvat credit based on the photocopy of the consolidated bill of entry, considering the unique circumstances of imports via courier and the practical challenges in obtaining original documents for each importer in such cases.