https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75551 Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because it was taken on supplementary invoices issued for differential duty paid after finalisation of provisional assessment or price escalation. Where the supplier had actually paid the duty and the recipient's credit matched that duty, the supplementary invoices constituted valid duty-paying documents for the relevant period. The procedural requirement governing credit documents could not override the substantive principle that credit follows duty paid, and a defect in the invoice form was only procedural, not substantive. Credit on the supplementary invoices was therefore admissible, the Revenue's challenge failed, and the cross-objection did not survive. en-us Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75551 Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because it was taken on supplementary invoices issued for differential duty paid after finalisation of provisional assessment or price escalation. Where the supplier had actually paid the duty and the recipient's credit matched that duty, the supplementary invoices constituted valid duty-paying documents for the relevant period. The procedural requirement governing credit documents could not override the substantive principle that credit follows duty paid, and a defect in the invoice form was only procedural, not substantive. Credit on the supplementary invoices was therefore admissible, the Revenue's challenge failed, and the cross-objection did not survive. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 02 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75551