Cenvat credit requires matching duty documents and received inputs; unsupported invoice mismatch defeats admissibility.

Cenvat credit was available only where the inputs described in the duty-paying documents were shown to have been received in the factory and used in manufacturing dutiable final products. The assessee could not prove that the goods mentioned in the invoice and the goods actually received were the same, and the supporting Form XXVII was rejected for lack of adequate corroboration. A claimed clerical mistake did not cure the mismatch in documentary evidence, so credit was held inadmissible and denial of credit was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether Cenvat credit was admissible when the goods received in the factory did not match the description in the duty-paying documents and the documents were not addressed to the factory or registered office but to a branch office.

Analysis: Credit can be taken only when the inputs described in the duty-paying documents are shown to have been received in the factory and used in the manufacture of dutiable final products. The assessee admitted a mismatch between the invoice description and the goods actually received, but failed to substantiate the claim that the two were the same goods. The Form XXVII produced as proof was rightly rejected for want of adequate supporting evidence, and the alleged clerical mistake did not cure the defect in documentary support.

Conclusion: Cenvat credit was not admissible, and the denial of credit was upheld in favour of Revenue.

---