Cenvat credit on bill of entry: endorsement not essential where goods were received and consignee address matched the claimant.

Cenvat credit cannot be denied merely because a bill of entry was not endorsed in the manufacturer's favour where the consignee address matches the manufacturer and receipt of the goods is not disputed. Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules treats a bill of entry as a valid document for availing credit and does not require endorsement in the name of the claimant as an additional condition. On that basis, the appellant was found to have a prima facie case, and pre-deposit of the credit demand, interest and penalty was waived with stay of recovery pending disposal of the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for the purpose of waiver of pre-deposit and stay, Cenvat credit could be denied merely because the bills of entry were not endorsed in the appellant's favour, when the goods were received at the appellant's factory.

Analysis: The bills of entry showed the consignee address as that of the appellant, and there was no allegation in the show cause notice that the goods covered by the bills of entry had not been received. Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules recognises a bill of entry as a valid document for availment of credit, and the rule does not require that such bill of entry must necessarily be endorsed in the name of the manufacturer taking credit. Where receipt of the goods by the manufacturer is not in dispute, credit cannot be denied on the sole technical ground of absence of endorsement.

Conclusion: The appellant had a prima facie case, and the requirement of pre-deposit of the credit demand, interest and penalty was waived with stay of recovery pending disposal of the appeal.

---