Invoice loss does not by itself bar credit where receipt of inputs and duty payment remain the ining tests under Rule 57G(6).

Credit under Rule 57G(6) cannot be denied merely because the duplicate invoice copy was lost in transit. The relevant inquiry is limited to whether the inputs were actually received in the factory and whether duty had been paid on those inputs. Because the original authority examined the matter on an incorrect understanding of the rule, the denial of credit could not stand. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether credit could be denied under Rule 57G(6) merely because the duplicate copy of the invoice was lost, without examining whether the inputs were received in the factory and duty had been paid on them.

Analysis: Rule 57G(6) permits credit on the basis of the original invoice when the duplicate copy is lost in transit, but the Assistant Commissioner's satisfaction is confined to two matters only, namely receipt of the inputs in the factory and payment of duty on those inputs. The original authority had not examined the dispute from this correct legal angle and had proceeded on a misinterpretation of the rule.

Conclusion: The denial of credit could not be sustained on the reasoning adopted, and the matter required reconsideration by the original adjudicating authority.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded to the extent that the impugned order was set aside and the matter was sent back for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Under Rule 57G(6), loss of the duplicate invoice is not by itself determinative; the inquiry is whether the inputs were received and duty was paid.

---