2018 (8) TMI 448 – CESTAT DELHI – TMI – CENVAT Credit – duty paying invoices – supplementary invoices, raised by M/s. South Eastern Coalfields Ltd., for supply of coal – Rule 9(1)(b) of CCR 2004 – matter pending adjudication – Held that:- Tribunal in connected matter of South Eastern Coalfield Ltd. in Appeal No.52023-52026/2014-DB dated 3.4.2017 vide Final Order No.52723-52726/2017 dated 3.4.2017, taking notice of pendency of similar matter before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. and ors. and also other cases, referred to in the above case, disposed of the appeal of the South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd., granting liberty to them to come again after having final verdict from the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
–
The appellant is entitled to take cenvat credit on the supplementary invoices in question – There is no element of fraud and suppression on the part of the appellant. The issue herein is recurring in nature – appeal allowed – decided in favor of
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
e of their inputs from SECL, Raigarh a subsidiary company of M/s. Coal India Ltd. Subsequently, they had received supplementary invoices issued by M/s. SECL during the period from June 2013 to September 2013 charging additional amount of excise duty & cess on royalty charges/stowing excise duty , paryavaran upkar , vikas upkar , forest fee and entry tax etc. in respect of coal earlier supplied by them. They had paid additional amount of duty & cess ₹ 63,69,674/- and taken credit in their cenvat credit register, which it appeared, are not valid documents for availing cenvat credit in terms of Rule 9(1) (b) of the CCR, 2004.Accordingly, a show cause notice No. V(15)ADJ/UDR/208/2015/1554 dated 29.09.2015 was issued to the appellant and subsequently proceeding was finalized by the adjudicating authority vide order-in-original no.77/CE/UDR/2016-17/ADC dated 04.01.2017 wherein Cenvat Credit was disallowed and ordered to recover the same along with interest and penalty. The said
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
by SECL, with the Govt. exchequer. 5. Ld. Counsel appearing for the appellant argues that in view of the admitted facts that the demand of duty on such charges like royalty charges, etc. is subjudice before the Hon ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.4056-5064/1999 (Mineral Area Development Vs. Steel Authority of India) and as such, the issue is debatable as to inclusion of aforesaid charges in the assessable value and as such, denial of cenvat credit by the Revenue on the ground of fraud, suppression is not tenable and have no legs to stand. The ld. Counsel further relies on this Tribunal s order in Assessee s own case on identical issue decided in his favour vide Final order no. 52486/2018 dated 03.07.2018. 6. Learned AR for the Revenue have reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 7. Having considered the rival contentions of both the sides, we take notice that this Tribunal in connected matter of South Eastern Coalfield Ltd. in Appeal No.52023-52026/2014-DB dated 3.4.2017 v
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =