https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202121 Cenvat credit cannot be denied merely because invoices name a job worker as consignee where the supplies are shown to be on account of the recipient, the goods are received in the recipient's premises, and the job worker has not availed credit. Documentary evidence of receipt and use of inputs, together with the absence of proof that the goods were not received by the recipient, is sufficient to sustain credit. A technical defect in the consignee name on the invoice is not enough to disallow credit when substantive receipt and utilisation are established. en-us Mon, 10 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Feb 2011 13:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202121 Cenvat credit cannot be denied merely because invoices name a job worker as consignee where the supplies are shown to be on account of the recipient, the goods are received in the recipient's premises, and the job worker has not availed credit. Documentary evidence of receipt and use of inputs, together with the absence of proof that the goods were not received by the recipient, is sufficient to sustain credit. A technical defect in the consignee name on the invoice is not enough to disallow credit when substantive receipt and utilisation are established. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 10 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202121