Cenvat credit on second stage dealer invoices upheld where the consignee was shown as the end user.

Cenvat credit was held admissible where the invoices were issued by a second stage dealer and the appellant was shown as consignee on the duty-paying documents. The Tribunal applied the Board circular stating that credit cannot be denied merely because the sale transaction is routed through another person when the end user's name appears as consignee. Relying on earlier decisions permitting credit on invoices issued by first stage or second stage dealers in such circumstances, the Revenue's challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether Cenvat credit was admissible when the invoices were issued by a second stage dealer and the appellant's name appeared as consignee, though the inputs were purchased through an agent of the dealer.

Analysis: The invoices on which credit was taken were issued by a second stage dealer and showed the appellant as consignee. The relevant Board circular clarified that where the end user's name appears as consignee in the duty-paying document, credit is not denied merely because the sale transaction is routed through another person. The Tribunal also relied on earlier decisions holding that credit is admissible on invoices issued by first stage or second stage dealers when the recipient is shown as consignee.

Conclusion: Cenvat credit was admissible to the appellant, and the Revenue's challenge failed.

---