EXCISE Appeal No. 10730 of 2013-SM
[Arising out of Order-in-Original/Appeal No CCEA-SRT-I-SSP-274-2012-13-U-S-35 dated
18.01.2013 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, CUSTOMS (Adjudication)-SURAT-I]
Gujarat Gas Limited
VERSUS
Commissioner of Central Excise & ST, Surat-i
APPEARANCE :
Shri Mrugesh Pandya, Advocate for the Appellant
Shri G. Kirupanandan, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the Revenue.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. RAMESH NAIR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
DATE OF HEARING/ DECISION: 30.01.2023
FINAL ORDER NO. A/10171/2023
RAMESH NAIR :
Learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order upheld the
confirmation of demand ordered by the Adjudicating Authority in respect of
Cenvat credit availed by the appellant on CNG Dispensers. The reason given
by both the lower authorities is that, in RG23-C Part-II, the documents on
which the Cenvat credit is to be availed is mentioned, which is invoice
number and the appellant could not produce the said invoice; and second
reason, as per the authorities is that appellant have taken credit in February
2006 whereas the machines were cleared in the month of April 2006. The
authorities have denied Cenvat credit on the ground that appellant could not
establish co-relation with the bill of entry on which they have claimed receipt
of goods and installation of goods in their factory. Therefore the present
appeal is filed by the appellant.
Shri Mrugesh Pandya, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellant submits that there is only clerical error that instead of bill of entry
number, foreign supplier’s invoice number, which is also appearing in bill of
entry mentioned in RG 23 C Part-II for the month October 2006. Since the
said invoice appeared in the bill of entry, co-relation has been established.
As regards the department’s contention that credit was taken in the month
of February 2006, he submits that this is apparently incorrect for the reason
that documents were dated as of February 2006 but the credit was taken in
October 2006. He submits that all the documents such as Bill of Entry,
installation certificate, transporters’ challan were submitted before both the
authorities but they have not considered these documents.
Shri G. Kirupanandan, learned Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing
on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order.
I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides
and perused the record. The action for denial of Cenvat credit was initiated
only on the basis that the appellant have mistakenly mentioned the foreign
supplier’s invoice number in RG 23C Part-II instead of bill of entry. The
appellant before the lower authorities have submitted the documents such
as Bill of Entry, Transporters’ Challan, Installation Certificate. On going
through these documents i.e. foreign supplier’s invoice number J168BJ1700
dated 24.02.,2006 is clearly mentioned in the bill of entry number 668712
dated 21.04.2006. The supplier invoice number though mistakenly
mentioned in the RG 23 C Part-II, the same being appeared in the bill of
entry, co-relation has been established. The transporters’ challan also
clearly shows that three numbers CNG Dispenser out of 13 numbers have
been received in the factory of the appellant. Though the installation of
machines is not a criteria for allowing Cenvat credit and Cenvat credit has to
be allowed at the relevant time only on the receipt of the goods in the
factory. Further, the appellant have also submitted Chartered Engineer
certificate dated 07.05.2009 whereby it was certified that three CNG
Dispensers bearing Model number, Serial number and Supplier’s name was
submitted to the department. On the basis of this Chartered Engineer
certificate, there is no doubt that three CNG Dispensers were received and
installed in the appellant’s factory.
On the basis of documents discussed hereinabove, I do not have any
doubt in my mind that three number dispensers were cleared by them under
bill of entry No. 668712 dated 21.04.2006 were received and installed in the
appellant’s factory. Accordingly, the impugned order is set-aside and the
appeal is allowed with consequential relief.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open court)
(Ramesh Nair)
Member (Judicial)
Leave a Reply