Cenvat credit and documentary proof of goods movement prevail over an uncorroborated delayed transporter's statement.

Cenvat credit cannot be denied solely on the basis of a delayed, uncorroborated third-party statement when contemporaneous documentary evidence supports receipt and movement of goods. Here, GRs and VAT-D3 forms showed transport and dispatch from the supplier to the assessee's premises, while no alternate source of procurement was established. The documentary record therefore prevailed over the transport operator's statement recorded after about three years, and the credit disallowance was held unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether Cenvat credit could be denied solely on the basis of a belated statement of a transport operator, despite documentary evidence showing transport and dispatch of goods.

Analysis: The denial of credit rested on the statement of a third party recorded after about three years, making it unsafe to rely on such statement in isolation. The appellant produced GRs and VAT-D3 forms showing movement and dispatch of goods from the supplier to its premises. The Revenue did not establish any alternate source of procurement. On these facts, the documentary record outweighed the uncorroborated delayed statement.

Conclusion: The credit could not be denied on the sole basis of the transporter's statement, and the disallowance was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The assessee succeeded in overturning the denial of credit, with consequential relief flowing from the allowance of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: Cenvat credit cannot be denied merely on an uncorroborated delayed third-party statement when contemporaneous documentary evidence establishes receipt and movement of goods.

---