Tribunal Affirms Cenvat Credit for Job Worker Addresses; Remands Input Use Verification; Allows Credit for Courier Services.

The Tribunal ruled that the appellant is eligible for Cenvat credit on invoices with the job worker's address, as the goods were used for manufacturing by the principal manufacturer. The Tribunal remanded the issue of input receipt and use verification to the adjudicating authority. Additionally, the Tribunal allowed Cenvat credit on courier services based on a prior decision, partially allowing the appeal. The decision was pronounced on 16.10.2024.

---

---

Issues:
Whether the appellant, as a principal manufacturer, is eligible for Cenvat credit on invoices addressed to them but with the job work address given, and the goods used at the job worker premises for manufacturing goods for the principal manufacturer.

Analysis:
The appellant's counsel argued that despite the job worker's address being on the invoice, as the goods were used for manufacturing goods for the principal manufacturer, credit cannot be denied. The counsel emphasized that the appellant's name was correctly mentioned in the invoices. It was contended that the lower authorities exceeded the show cause notice's scope by denying credit based on lack of evidence of input receipt and use. The counsel cited various judgments to support the appellant's position.

The Revenue's representative reiterated the impugned order's findings, maintaining the denial of credit.

Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal found that merely mentioning the job worker's address on the invoice, with the appellant's name correctly stated, does not warrant denying Cenvat credit. Since the job worker processes goods for the principal manufacturer, the presence of the job worker's address on the invoice is justified. The Tribunal held that the appellant is eligible for the credit. However, it noted that verification of input receipt and use at the job worker premises is necessary, directing the matter back to the adjudicating authority for a fresh order.

Regarding the courier service issue, the Tribunal referred to a previous decision in the appellant's case where Cenvat credit on courier services was allowed. Relying on this precedent, the Tribunal ruled that Cenvat credit on courier services is admissible to the appellant. Consequently, the appeal was partly allowed concerning courier services, while remanding other services to the adjudicating authority for further review.

The Tribunal's decision was pronounced in open court on 16.10.2024.

---