Cenvat credit on a courier bill of entry photocopy was upheld where consignee details and use of goods were undisputed.

Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because the assessee produced a photocopy of the courier bill of entry instead of the original under Rule 9(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The bill of entry covered multiple consignees and was filed through a courier agency, making it impracticable for each importer to obtain the original document. The assessee was named as consignee, the courier's authorised signatory had endorsed the document, and receipt and use of the imported goods were undisputed. On these facts, the documentary record sufficiently supported the credit claim and the photocopy was treated as admissible evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether cenvat credit could be denied merely because the assessee relied on a photocopy of the courier bill of entry instead of the original document under Rule 9(1) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

Analysis: The bill of entry covered several consignees and had been filed through a courier agency, making it impracticable for each importer to receive an original document. The assessee's name appeared as consignee, the document bore endorsement by the authorised signatory of the courier service, and the receipt and use of the imported goods were not disputed. In these circumstances, the credit claim was supported by the documentary record and the benefit could not be denied on the mere ground that the document produced was a photocopy.

Conclusion: Cenvat credit on the photocopy of the courier bill of entry was admissible, and the appeal failed.

---