https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204059 The Tribunal set aside the denial of credit to the appellants, ruling in their favor. The denial was based on the endorsement of head office address on invoices for goods received at the factory, which the Central Excise department deemed as a violation of Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal found that despite the address endorsement, the goods were received against duty paid invoices and used in manufacturing final products with duty discharged. The Tribunal concluded that the denial of credit based solely on the address endorsement was unfounded, citing relevant case laws supporting the appellants' position. en-us Thu, 03 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 May 2011 15:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204059 The Tribunal set aside the denial of credit to the appellants, ruling in their favor. The denial was based on the endorsement of head office address on invoices for goods received at the factory, which the Central Excise department deemed as a violation of Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal found that despite the address endorsement, the goods were received against duty paid invoices and used in manufacturing final products with duty discharged. The Tribunal concluded that the denial of credit based solely on the address endorsement was unfounded, citing relevant case laws supporting the appellants' position. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 03 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204059