Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S.Associated Pigments Ltd vs Cce-Haldia Commissionerate on 26 May, 2014
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA
EASTERN ZONAL BENCH: KOLKATA
Stay Petition No.SP-75136/14
&
Appeal No.Ex.Ap.75088/14
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.03/HAL/2013 dated 30.03.2013 passed by the Commissioner(Appeal-I) of Central Excise & Service Tax, Kolkata.)
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE
HONBLE DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER(JUDICIAL)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see
the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT
(Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the
CESTAT(Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any
Authorative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordship wishes to see the fair copy
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
Authorities?
M/s.Associated Pigments Ltd.
Applicant (s)/Appellant (s)
Vs.
CCE-Haldia Commissionerate
Respondent (s)
Appearance:
Shri S.N.Sinha Mohapatra, Advocate for the Appellant (s) Shri A.K.Biswas, Supdt.(A.R.) for the Revenue (s) CORAM:
Honble Dr. D.M. Misra, Member(Judicial) Date of Hearing/Decision :- 26.05.2014 Date of Pronouncement :- 26.05.2014 ORDER NO.FO/A/75325/2014 Per Dr. D.M. Misra.
1. This is an Application seeking waiver of pre-deposit of CENVAT Credit of Rs.11.80 Lakhs and equal amount of penalty imposed under Rule 13(2) of CENVAT Credit Rules read with Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944.
2. At the outset the Ld.Advocate for the Applicant submits that the Ld.Commissioner has not decided the issue on merits but dismissed their Appeal on the ground of failure to deposit Rs.10.00 Lakhs under Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944. He submits that they have availed CENVAT Credit on the photocopy of Bill of Entry No.185299 dated 17.03.2004 or 28.05.2004 and utilized the same towards payment of Central Excise duty. Demand notice has been issued to them alleging that the photocopy of the Bill of Entry is not a proper document for availing CENVAT Credit. He submits that subsequently they have obtained a certificate from the Customs House, Kolkata on 27.02.2006 wherein it was certified that the said Bill of Entry dated 17.03.2004 be considered as duplicate and triplicate copy. The Ld.Advocate submits that there are catena of cases wherein it has been held that the Xerox copy of the Bill of Entries/invoices may be accepted in absence of the duplicate or triplicate copies of Bill of Entry or invoices as the case may be. The Ld.Advocate submits that even though the Bill of Entry was in the name of their Unit at 260, B.T. Road, P.O.Sukhchar, Kolkata but the