Cenvat credit cannot be denied for handwritten invoice serial numbers when tax payment and invoice issuance are undisputed.

Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because invoice serial numbers were handwritten rather than printed where service tax payment by the providers was undisputed and the invoices themselves were not challenged. Rule 4A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and the corresponding invoice requirements under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 did not make printed serial numbers a substantive condition for credit eligibility. The Tribunal followed earlier decisions treating handwritten serial numbers as a curable or technical defect, not a disqualification. The credit disallowance was therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether Cenvat credit could be denied merely because the invoice serial numbers were handwritten instead of printed.

Analysis: The service tax payment by the service providers was not disputed, and the issuance of the invoices by those providers was also not challenged. The only objection was that the serial numbers on the invoices were handwritten. The legal requirements under Rule 4A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and the analogous invoice requirements under Rule 11 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 did not justify treating the absence of printed serial numbers as a substantive defect. The Tribunal also noted that the requirement had been considered in earlier decisions, where handwritten serial numbers were not treated as a disqualification for credit.

Conclusion: Cenvat credit could not be denied on this purely technical ground, and the disallowance was unsustainable.

---