https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76363 Cenvat credit on inputs and capital goods could not be denied merely because invoices reflected the assessee's brand name and address instead of its company name. Receipt of duty-paid goods, their use in manufacture, and proper recording in the accounts were established, and the address on the invoices sufficiently identified the goods as belonging to the assessee. The defect was only a minor procedural lapse, and the applicable Board circular accepted credit despite such irregularities where duty payment and actual use were shown. On those facts, denial of credit was unjustified and the Commissioner (Appeals)'s allowance of credit was legally correct. en-us Fri, 28 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Apr 2013 14:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76363 Cenvat credit on inputs and capital goods could not be denied merely because invoices reflected the assessee's brand name and address instead of its company name. Receipt of duty-paid goods, their use in manufacture, and proper recording in the accounts were established, and the address on the invoices sufficiently identified the goods as belonging to the assessee. The defect was only a minor procedural lapse, and the applicable Board circular accepted credit despite such irregularities where duty payment and actual use were shown. On those facts, denial of credit was unjustified and the Commissioner (Appeals)'s allowance of credit was legally correct. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 28 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76363