Cenvat credit on trader's invoice upheld where transporter marking requirement was introduced later and not retrospective.

Credit could not be denied merely because the availment was supported by an original trader's invoice, where the requirement that trader invoices be marked "duplicate for transporter" was introduced under Rule 57GG only from 19-1-1995. The rule then in force under Rule 57A applied to manufacturer invoices and could not be extended retrospectively to the earlier trader invoice in question. On these facts, the credit was treated as validly taken, and the associated penalty was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether credit could be denied on the ground that the trader's invoice was not marked as "duplicate for transporter" when the invoice had been issued before the requirement was introduced under Rule 57GG.

Analysis: The credit was disallowed solely because the invoice used for availment was an original trader's invoice. The relevant requirement that invoices issued by traders must be marked "duplicate for transporter" was introduced under Rule 57GG only with effect from 19-1-1995 through Notification No. 2/95, whereas the invoice in question had been issued earlier. The requirement under Rule 57A was applicable to manufacturer invoices and could not be extended to the earlier trader invoice for the present period. On the facts, the Tribunal followed the earlier decision relied upon by the appellant and held that the credit had been validly taken.

Conclusion: The denial of credit and the penalty were unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.

---