9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (3) TMI 527X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder]. The issue involved in this case is as to whether Cenvat credit is admissible on the strength of invoices which had been endorsed by the unregistered depot of the supplier alongwith their commercial invoice during the period March, 2003 to August, 2003. The relevant facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of lead and zinc concentrates falling u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Credit Rules, 2002 provides that Cenvat credit under Rule 3 shall not be denied on the grounds that any of the documents mentioned in sub-rule (1) does not contain all the particulars required to be contained therein under such rule, if such document contains details of payment of duty, description of the goods, assessable value, name and address of the factory or warehouse. He submits that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, it is seen from the invoice that CEAT Limited issued the invoice to their depot. The depot of CEAT Limited endorsed the said invoice in respect of one of the items in favour of the appellant. Cenvat credit can be availed on the basis of the documents as provided under Rule 7 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. On plain reading of sub-rule (1) Rule 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mentioned under sub-rule (1A) of Rule 7 provides the manufacturer name and address and not the recipient of inputs. I do not find any force in the submission of the appellant that there is no requirement to mention the recipient name in the duty paying documents. At any event, the appellant failed to take credit on the basis of documents as prescribed under rule 7 (l)(a) of the said Rules and ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
