TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 372
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase are that the respondent viz. M/s. SPS Metal Cast & Alloys Ltd., is a manufacturer of non-alloy ingots. They have availed CENVAT Credit on pig iron, which is one of their major inputs. The respondent has procured input i.e., pig iron, from IISCO, Burnpur and transported it by way of railway wagons to the railway yards at Dankuni/Shibpurchar. Thereafter, the pig iron was transported by trucks to their factory at Durgapur. The department alleged that the respondent had not received the goods in their factory and had availed credit on the strength of invoices alone without actual receipt of goods into the factory. 3. Four Show Cause Notices were issued to the respondent proposing to disallow the CENVAT Credit on pig iron procured from II....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to any subordinate officer. Accordingly, the Tribunal observed that the decision taken by the adjudicating authority based on the findings of the Superintendent amounts to non-application of mind. The CESTAT also observed that CENVAT Credit is available when inputs are used in the manufacture of final products and the burden of proof regarding admissibility of CENVAT Credit is on the manufacturer taking such credit. With this direction, the CESTAT had set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the Ld. Commissioner for deciding the matter afresh. 5. In the de novo proceedings, the Ld. Commissioner has observed that no evidence was adduced by the department to prove the allegation that the inputs were not received in the factory ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ailed to prove the charges with evidence. They relied on the decision in the case of Ranjeev Alloys Ltd. v. Commissioner of C.Ex., Chandigarh [2009 (236) E.L.T. 124 (Tri. - Del.)] wherein it was held that when the movement of inputs is found to be fake, the onus is shifted to the assessee to prove that the goods were duly received by them and used in the manufacture of iron and steel items. The Department also relied on the decision in the case of Simplex Castings Ltd. v. Commissioner of C.Ex., Raipur [Final Order No. 258-261/07-SM(BR) dated 27.12.2006] wherein the Tribunal has upheld the order of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) denying CENVAT Credit on the inputs which were not received by the respondent in their factory.They also relied up....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent had diverted the said inputs without using the same in their factory for manufacture of the excisable goods. 10. Further, it is observed that the ld. adjudicating authority has made the following observations while dropping the impugned proceedings: - "4.1 I have gone through the records of the case and considered the various submissions made by the Noticee. The allegations made in the show cause notice is that since the Noticee could not produce any road challan indicating the vehicle no. for the delivery of pig iron from Dankuni / Shibpurchar railway yard to the Durgapur factory premises, there has been no actual receipt of the input in the factory and the CENVAT credit taken on that quantity of pig iron was irregular / il....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... part of the Noticee to produce the vehicle Nos., vide which the said inputs were brought into their manufacturing premises, is not sufficient to establish the charges framed in the subject Show Cause Notices, as has been held in a number of judicial pronouncements. In this regard, it has been held by the Hon'ble CESTAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi, in the case of CCE, Ludhiana Vs Parmatma Singh Jatinder Singh Alloys Pvt. Ltd. that- ............................................ 4.6 Further I find that the Noticee has all along contended that. after receipt of the said inputs at their factory, necessary entries were made in their records / registers indicating receipt and subsequent issue of such inputs in the manufacturi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le of law that when the duty paid inputs have been received and used in the manufacture of final products, credit on such inputs cannot be denied. I find that in the instant case it is on record that the fact of dutiability of the said inputs, recording of the same in the records of the Noticee and subsequent use of the same in the manufacture of their finished goods have not been disputed, and the allegation of non-receipt of inputs has not been justified with corroborative evidence. 4.9 In view of such position and taking into account all the relevant facts it has to be concluded that in absence of justifiable and cogent evidence it is difficult to come to the conclusion that pig iron in question has not been received in the fact....