Cenvat credit on capital goods is limited to the duty shown in the supplier's invoice, not the full original duty paid.

Cenvat credit on capital goods could not be taken beyond the duty amount reflected in the supplier's invoice, because the invoice was the prescribed document for claiming credit under the applicable excise rules. The supplier had availed and reversed only 50% credit, and the resale invoice showed only that reversed amount as duty paid. On those facts, the assessee was confined to the credit evidenced by the invoice and could not claim the full duty originally paid by the manufacturer. The challenge to denial of the additional credit therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to take Cenvat credit on capital goods beyond the credit amount reflected in the supplier's invoice when the goods were cleared under the applicable excise rules.

Analysis: The credit on capital goods was governed by the relevant excise rule allowing availment in the prescribed manner and the invoice issued by the supplier was the document for taking credit. The supplier had already availed and reversed only 50% credit and the invoice issued on resale reflected only that reversed amount as duty paid. In these circumstances, the appellant could not claim credit on the entire duty originally paid by the manufacturer, but was confined to the amount incorporated in the invoice.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to take credit beyond the amount shown in the invoice, and the challenge to the denial of full credit failed.

---