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 could be denied on supplementary invoices issued for differential duty paid by the supplier, on the ground that Rule 9(1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was not satisfied.
Analysis: The only substantive objection was that the supplementary invoices related to inputs transferred as such and, therefore, were said to fall outside Rule 9(1)(b). The Tribunal held that the supplier unit was a manufacturer and registered with Central Excise, and that the supplementary invoices reflected duty actually paid on the goods. Even assuming the documents were not covered in the exact manner suggested by the revenue, the invoices remained duty-paying documents and the substantive conditions for Cenvat credit were satisfied, namely receipt of duty-paid inputs in the factory and use in the manufacture of final products. The Tribunal treated Rule 9(1)(b) as procedural and held that such a provision could not defeat credit otherwise admissible on the merits.
Conclusion: Cenvat credit on the supplementary invoices was admissible and the denial of credit was unsustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the substantive conditions for Cenvat credit are met, credit cannot be denied merely because the differential duty is evidenced by supplementary invoices and the objection is only procedural under Rule 9(1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.