Order date – 17 June 2022

Facts:

• The Petitioner, Suyog Telematics Limited, was issued two show cause notices were being issued to the petitioners dated 22.10.2012 for the period from 2007-08 to 2010-11 and 2011-12.
• The authorities in the first show cause notice allowed the CENVAT of Rs.2,99,229/- and  in the second show cause notice allowed CENVAT of Rs.1,58,040/-.
• The Petitioner filed a declaration in form of SVLDRS-1 (Sab Ka Vishwas Dispute Resolution Scheme 2019) but the Respondents did not accept the Petitioner’s case with regard to CENVAT and issued SVLDRS-3.
• The entire CENVAT credit claimed by the Petitioner was not allowed by the adjudicating authority while passing the order in original. The stand of the Respondent is that the Petitioner never produced on record the documents to justify the claim of CENVAT credit.
• Aggrieved the petitioner filed a writ petition.

Issue:

Whether the CENVAT Credit claimed by the petitioner is justifiable?

Order:

• The High Court observed that no doubt Petitioner would be entitled for the benefit of CENVAT credit but the same has to be justified with documentary evidence and the petitioner is failed in do so.
• The Court rejected the contentions of the Petitioner providing that in para 10(g) of the circular dated 27.08.2019 it is clarified that any amount of CENVAT credit in dispute, the Designated Committee shall deduct the same while issuing the SVLDR3-3.
• It was held that the CENVAT credit claimed by the Petitioner is already disallowed by the adjudicating authority, the Appeal is also dismissed and the same has attained finality. Hence, Circular dated 27/08/2019 relied by the Petitioner would not apply.
• In light of the above mentioned findings the court upheld the order and dismissed the petition.