CENVAT credit remains admissible despite minor invoice defects when duty-paid receipt and use of inputs are established.

CENVAT credit cannot be denied merely because dealer invoices were not pre-printed or were otherwise procedurally imperfect, where they were serially numbered and the duty-paid receipt and use of inputs remained verifiable. Rule 11 of the CENVAT Credit Rules requires serial numbering of invoices, not pre-numbered formats, and minor invoicing lapses do not by themselves show misuse of credit. Where the record establishes receipt and sale of duty-paid goods and the department identifies only formal defects, credit remains admissible. The departmental appeal therefore failed and the credit claim was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether CENVAT credit could be denied on the ground that the dealer's invoices were not pre-numbered or duly intimated to the department and contained other procedural irregularities.

Analysis: The invoices were found to be serially numbered and the record showed receipt and sale of duty-paid goods to a single buyer within the same premises. The alleged defects related to the form and manner of invoicing and did not establish any misuse of credit. Rule 11 of the CENVAT Credit Rules required serial numbering of invoices, not pre-printed numbering, and the departmental circular also discouraged denial of credit for minor procedural lapses where the duty-paid character and use of inputs were otherwise verifiable.

Conclusion: CENVAT credit could not be denied for the procedural irregularities alleged, and the assessee was entitled to the credit.

Final Conclusion: The departmental appeal failed, and the order allowing the credit claim was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: CENVAT credit cannot be denied for minor procedural defects in invoices when the invoices are serially numbered and the duty-paid receipt and use of inputs are otherwise established.

---