Cenvat credit dispute over invoice-description mismatch sent for third-Member reference after divergent views on admissibility.

Cenvat credit on steel inputs was disputed because the invoices described the goods as CRC or CR sheets while the goods received and recorded were HR or HRC sheets. The Members took differing views on whether this discrepancy justified denial of credit and, because no consensus was reached, directed that the matter be placed before the Hon'ble President for reference to a third Member. The order does not finally decide the admissibility of credit on the merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether cenvat credit could be denied on the ground that the invoices described the inputs as CRC sheets or CR sheets while the goods received and accounted for by the appellant were HR sheets or HRC sheets, and whether the appeal could be finally disposed of on the merits.

Outcome: The Members recorded differing views on the admissibility of cenvat credit and directed that the matter be placed before the Hon'ble President for reference to a third Member to resolve the point of difference; no final adjudication on the merits was made in this order.

---