Cenvat credit on a wrongly numbered GAR-7 challan faced no prima facie bar where invoices were later corrected and no double credit arose.

Cenvat credit taken on a GAR-7 challan was not prima facie disallowed where the challan correctly reflected the assessee's name and address, and only the excise registration number was wrong. The invoices were later corrected by the service providers, and there was no allegation that another unit had also taken credit on the same invoices. On these facts, the challenge to credit lacked prima facie support, so pre-deposit of the disputed credit, interest and penalty was waived and recovery was stayed pending the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether pre-deposit of the disputed Cenvat credit, interest and penalty should be waived and recovery stayed in respect of credit taken on a GAR-7 challan mentioning the wrong excise registration number and invoices initially issued to another unit.

Analysis: The GAR-7 showed the appellant's name and address correctly, and only the excise registration number was erroneous. The invoices were later corrected by the service providers, and there was no allegation that the other unit had taken credit on the same invoices. On these facts, the claim for denial of credit was found to lack prima facie support.

Outcome: The appellant was held to have a prima facie case, the pre-deposit was waived, and recovery was stayed pending disposal of the appeal.

---