https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211670 Cenvat credit could not be denied solely because invoices omitted the consignee's name where the proviso to Rule 9(2) permitted credit if the prescribed particulars were otherwise available and receipt and accounting of goods were established. The document treats the consignee's name as a non-essential particular in that proviso. Because the lower authorities had not examined whether the remaining statutory conditions were satisfied on the record, the matter required scrutiny of the invoices and books of account. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh consideration on eligibility of credit. en-us Tue, 03 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Feb 2014 14:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211670 Cenvat credit could not be denied solely because invoices omitted the consignee's name where the proviso to Rule 9(2) permitted credit if the prescribed particulars were otherwise available and receipt and accounting of goods were established. The document treats the consignee's name as a non-essential particular in that proviso. Because the lower authorities had not examined whether the remaining statutory conditions were satisfied on the record, the matter required scrutiny of the invoices and books of account. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh consideration on eligibility of credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 03 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211670