https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234999 Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because the procedure under Notification No. 44/2001-CE(NT) was not followed while procuring inputs against Advance Licence or Advance Authorization through ARO or invalidation letter. The governing notification and related rules did not make that duty-free clearance procedure the sole mandatory condition in these facts. Since the suppliers had in fact paid duty from PLA and had not claimed refund of terminal excise duty, the Revenue's objection of credit shifting failed. As duty had actually been paid on the inputs and no revenue loss was shown, the assessees were entitled to Cenvat credit. en-us Wed, 10 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Feb 2014 14:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234999 Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because the procedure under Notification No. 44/2001-CE(NT) was not followed while procuring inputs against Advance Licence or Advance Authorization through ARO or invalidation letter. The governing notification and related rules did not make that duty-free clearance procedure the sole mandatory condition in these facts. Since the suppliers had in fact paid duty from PLA and had not claimed refund of terminal excise duty, the Revenue's objection of credit shifting failed. As duty had actually been paid on the inputs and no revenue loss was shown, the assessees were entitled to Cenvat credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 10 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234999