https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202836 The court partially allowed the appeal, restoring the original authority's demand for duty and interest. The judge upheld credit for two invoices without discrepancies but disallowed credit for an invoice with transport document inconsistencies. The burden of proving material receipt lay with the assessee, which was not met due to significant discrepancies. The judge concluded that penalty restoration was not justified. The final decision set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order on credit extension, reinstating the duty demand of Rs.70,935 along with interest. en-us Wed, 05 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Mar 2011 11:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202836 The court partially allowed the appeal, restoring the original authority's demand for duty and interest. The judge upheld credit for two invoices without discrepancies but disallowed credit for an invoice with transport document inconsistencies. The burden of proving material receipt lay with the assessee, which was not met due to significant discrepancies. The judge concluded that penalty restoration was not justified. The final decision set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order on credit extension, reinstating the duty demand of Rs.70,935 along with interest. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 05 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202836