Cenvat credit cannot be denied for missing originals when receipt and use of inputs are undisputed; fresh verification may still be needed.

Cenvat credit may not be denied solely because the claimant produced certified copies or photocopies of duty-paying documents when receipt of inputs in the factory and their use in manufacturing taxable final products are not disputed; in that situation, the available evidence is sufficient to support the credit claim. Where an original transport copy for one invoice is produced for the first time before the Tribunal and was not examined by the lower authority, the proper course is remand for fresh verification and decision on that specific claim. The note therefore recognises allowance of credit on most disputed documents and remand for one invoice-related issue.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether Cenvat credit could be allowed on certified copies or photocopies of duty-paying documents where receipt of inputs and their use in manufacture were not disputed. (ii) Whether the claim based on the original transport copy produced for one invoice required remand for fresh verification.

Issue (i): Whether Cenvat credit could be allowed on certified copies or photocopies of duty-paying documents where receipt of inputs and their use in manufacture were not disputed.

Analysis: The dispute concerned denial of credit only on the ground that original documents were not produced. The record showed no controversy regarding receipt of the goods in the factory or their use in manufacture of taxable final products. In such circumstances, denial of credit merely because the documents produced were certified copies or photocopies was treated as unjustified.

Conclusion: Cenvat credit was allowed in respect of the documents covered by serial numbers 13 to 17.

Issue (ii): Whether the claim based on the original transport copy produced for one invoice required remand for fresh verification.

Analysis: For the invoice covered by serial number 12, the original transport copy was produced before the Tribunal during hearing. Since the document had not been examined by the lower authority on that basis, the proper course was to have the adjudicating authority verify it and decide the credit claim afresh.

Conclusion: The matter relating to serial number 12 was remanded for reconsideration.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded in part by allowing credit for most disputed documents and by remanding one invoice-related claim for fresh decision.

Ratio Decidendi: Where receipt and use of inputs are undisputed, Cenvat credit cannot be denied solely for non-production of original duty-paying documents if the available evidence otherwise establishes the claim, and a claim based on a newly produced original document may warrant remand for verification.

---