Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the ISD's distribution of CENVAT/ITC to the recipient unit was lawful; mere technical defects in supplier invoices (addressed to another unit or absence of non-essential particulars) and reliance on internal CWIP ledgers do not suffice to disallow credit where genuineness is not disproved and corroborative evidence (payments, vouchers, performance proof) exists. The Tribunal found no findings of fabricated invoices, shell suppliers or circular payments and concluded the Department failed to establish the two statutory conditions under Rule 7/ISD provisions. Further, invocation of the extended limitation period was not established, rendering the demand time-barred. Consequently the demand, interest and penalties were vacated.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
