Cenvat credit on dealer's original invoice cannot be denied merely for absence of triplicate copy.

Credit under Notifications No. 32/94-C.E. (N.T.) and 33/94-C.E. (N.T.) was available on the basis of invoices issued by registered dealers, and the dealer's original invoice was sufficient for availment. Denial of credit solely because the appellants did not file the triplicate copy was unsustainable, since the appellate authority overlooked the notifications' express basis for credit. The operative legal point is that documentary compliance must be assessed against the notification itself, and credit cannot be refused on a requirement not imposed by it.

---

---

Issues: Whether credit could be denied when the appellants claimed the benefit of the relevant notifications and produced the dealer's original invoice instead of the triplicate copy.

Analysis: The common order dealt with appeals arising under Notifications No. 32/94-C.E. (N.T.) and 33/94-C.E. (N.T.), under which credit was available on the basis of invoices issued by registered dealers. The appellate authority had dismissed the appeals without considering the notifications and on the sole ground that the appellants should have filed the triplicate copy of the invoices. Since the notification permitted availment of credit on the basis of the dealer's original invoice, the refusal of credit on that ground was unsustainable.

Conclusion: Credit could not be denied on the ground adopted by the appellate authority, and the appeals were allowed.

---