"PROCEDURAL LAPSE CAANOT DENY SUBSTANTIAL BENEFIT"

The legal principle is that minor procedural errors should not be a reason for denying substantive benefits to a taxpayer.

1) Tribunal set-aside the order denying CENVAT Credit to the assessee and held that, procedural lapses cannot be the ground for denying substantial benefits to the assessee. CESTAT Kolkatta in M/s S. L. Polypack Pvt. Ltd. [Excise Appeal No. 75342 of 2018; dated 20-Jan-2023]

2) Assessee had not followed the proper procedure for claiming exemption notification. Department denied exemption alleging that they have not followed the procedure as prescribed in the notification.

However, the Honourable Supreme Court held that though there was mistake on the part of assessee by not following the proper procedure, but it is merely a technical lapse for which the substantial benefit cannot be denied. Formica India Division [(1995) 3 TMI 98 SC]

3) There is no dispute regarding duty payment or credit availed. Substantial benefit cannot be denied for procedural irregularities. CESTAT Chennai in MRF Limited (2009) 244 ELT 601

4) Substantial benefit cannot be denied to assessee on the basis of procedural irregularity when under the Rule 11 of Central Excise Rules, 2001, there is no obligation of printed serial number on the invoices. CESTAT Ahmedabad in Sanathan Textiles P. Ltd. [(2013) 293 ELT 44]

5) Invoices issued by the registered dealer, a depot holder of IOC, a public sector undertaking, initially bore dummy numbers on authorisation from IOC which later corrected to regular numbers. No doubt about the input being duty paid and having been duly received.

It is well settled that substantial benefit of Modvat credit cannot be disallowed on a mere procedural irregularity. CEGAT Delhi in J.K. Synthetics Ltd. [(2000) 115 ELT 787 (Tri. Del)]

Hope you will find this useful.

Thanks

Abhishek Raja Ram