CENVAT credit on original manufacturer invoice held admissible where the relevant rules treated it as the duty paying document.

Under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2001, the manufacturer's invoice was the relevant duty paying document for the disputed period, so credit could not be denied merely because it was taken on the original invoice rather than the duplicate copy. The earlier regime under Rule 52A and Rule 57G, where the duplicate copy had significance, no longer governed the period in question. A cited precedent was distinguished because it involved an office copy or extra copy, not the manufacturer's invoice. In the absence of any applicable rule barring such availment, CENVAT credit was held admissible and the denial unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether CENVAT credit could be denied for the period December 2001 to April 2002 on the ground that it was taken on the original invoice issued by the manufacturer rather than on the duplicate copy.

Analysis: For the relevant period, the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2001 governed availment of credit, and under those rules the invoice issued by the manufacturer was the relevant duty paying document. The earlier regime under Rule 52A and Rule 57G, under which the duplicate copy had significance, had already been altered by amendment and did not control the disputed period. The objection raised by Revenue was also distinguished on facts because the cited precedent concerned an office copy or extra copy, whereas the present case involved the manufacturer's invoice. In the absence of any rule prohibiting credit on such invoice during the relevant period, denial of credit was unsustainable.

Conclusion: CENVAT credit was admissible and the denial of credit was incorrect.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the governing credit rules for the relevant period recognize the manufacturer's invoice as the duty paying document and no applicable rule prohibits its use, credit cannot be denied merely because the invoice is not a duplicate copy.

---