2016 (12) TMI 333

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the Appellant and not in the name of the Appellant, CENVAT Credit cannot be admissible. I find that the Appellant later corrected the invoices/documents from the input supplier by incorporating their name; besides the said inputs/input services were received and utilized in the manufacture of final products. In the result, the impugned order being devoid of merit is set aside - appeal allowed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t on which credit availed, since not in their name, demand notice was issued for recovery of credit with proposal for imposition of penalty. On adjudication, the demand was confirmed and equal penalty was imposed. Aggrieved by the said order, they filed an appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), who in turn upheld the order of the Adjudicating Authority and rejected their appeal. Henc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... port of his contention that the corrected invoice/document copies are valid for availing CENVAT Credit, the learned Advocate referred to the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of CCE Salem Vs Chemplast Sanmar Ltd - 2007 (208) ELT (Tri-Che). 5. The learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the learned Commissioner (Appeals). 6. I find that the only objec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X