M/S. Bharti Hexacom Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise

[Arising out of Order-In-Appeal No. 435(DKV) ST/JPR-1/2010 dated 9/12/2010 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Jaipur]

For approval and signature:

Honble Mr Ashok Jindal, 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 authoritative report or not?

3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

M/s. Bharti Hexacom Ltd. Appellants

Vs.

Commissioner of Central Excise Respondent

Jaipur

Appearance:

Shri Narender Kumar, Advocate for the Appellants

Ms. Ranjana Jha, AR for the Respondent

CORAM:

Hon'ble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)

Date of Hearing /decision: 29.06.2015

ORDER NO. FO/ 52067 /2015-Ex(SM)

Per Ashok Jindal :

The short issue involved in this appeal is whether the appellant is entitled to take cenvat credit on the strength of debit note which indicates all the details as per Rule 9(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 to avail Cenvat Credit or not.

2. Heard the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant relied on the decision of Supreme Industries Ltd. [2014 TIOL-115-CESTAT-MUM] and submits that as debit note contains all the details as required under Rule 9(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, so they are entitled to take Cenvat credit.

4. On the other hand, learned AR relied on the Godrej Consumer Products Ltd. [2010 (20) STR 609 (Tri-Del)] to say that on the strength of debit note the appellant is not entitled to take Cenvat Credit. She further submits that Rule 9 does not mention debit note for availment of cenvat credit.

5. On going through the case law, relied upon by both the sides, I find that if debit note contain all the required details for availment of Cenvat Credit, as per Rule 9(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and these details are as per invoices/ bill of entry, the assessee is entitled to take Cenvat Credit. Admittedly, it is not in dispute that the debit note do not contain the required details as required by Revenue under Rule 9(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Therefore relying on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Supreme Industries Ltd. (supra) and Aditya Polysack Pvt. Ltd. [2015-TIOL-996-CESTAT-DEL], I hold that appellant is entitled to take Cenvat Credit on the strength of debit note which contains all the required details as per Rule 9(1) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. In these terms, I set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief.

(Dictated and pronounced in the open court )

( Ashok Jindal ) Member(Judicial)

ss

2