Mangalam Alloys Ltd. v. CCE

Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017

--Cenvat credit--Duty paid on inputsAssessee failed to establish that goods were actually received by it----Where assessee failed to establish actual movement of goods, Revenue was justified in denying Cenvat credit of duty paid on inputs to assessee.--Assessee claimed Cenvat credit of duty paid on inputs received under various invoices. Revenue denied Cenvat credit on the basis of RTO's report suggesting that vehicles, in which goods were transported, were incapable of carrying the quantity of such inputs. Further, suppliers' representatives' statements were recorded, which failed to provide any satisfactory explanation for such discrepancies. Assessee's representatives were also not able to explain the discrepancies. Thus, Cenvat credit was denied to assessee. Assessee contended that goods were ordered on FOR basis and therefore it was not obliged to explain the manner of transportation.Held: When RTO in its report strongly suggested that vehicles in which the goods were transported were incapable of doing so, the burden would be on assessee to dislodge the primary findings particularly when the report of RTO was not challenged. The reason was further augmented when seen in light of statement of representative of supplier who also could not explain the discrepancy. Thus, it could not be said that findings of Tribunal in respect of said invoices were perverse.