https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255788 Exemption under Notification No. 108/95-C.E. was not liable to be denied merely because the invoices were issued in a dealer's name, where the project certificate identified the contractor as the consignee and the records showed the goods were actually received for an ADB-funded State project. The substantive exemption conditions were treated as satisfied, and the invoicing route did not defeat eligibility. On that basis, the Revenue's challenge failed and the exemption was upheld. en-us Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Jan 2015 19:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255788 Exemption under Notification No. 108/95-C.E. was not liable to be denied merely because the invoices were issued in a dealer's name, where the project certificate identified the contractor as the consignee and the records showed the goods were actually received for an ADB-funded State project. The substantive exemption conditions were treated as satisfied, and the invoicing route did not defeat eligibility. On that basis, the Revenue's challenge failed and the exemption was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255788