https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256649 Substantial documentary evidence of receipt of inputs, including invoices from registered dealers, GRNs, statutory records and payment through account payee cheques, could not be displaced by limited transporter statements, parallel invoice numbers or minor discrepancies in vehicle details. On that record, CENVAT credit was sustained in favour of the assessees. The extended period of limitation also failed because the department did not establish fraud, collusion or suppression by the assessees; the related demands and penalties therefore could not survive. The Revenue's challenge was rejected, and the appellate finding allowing credit was upheld. en-us Fri, 12 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jan 2016 17:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256649 Substantial documentary evidence of receipt of inputs, including invoices from registered dealers, GRNs, statutory records and payment through account payee cheques, could not be displaced by limited transporter statements, parallel invoice numbers or minor discrepancies in vehicle details. On that record, CENVAT credit was sustained in favour of the assessees. The extended period of limitation also failed because the department did not establish fraud, collusion or suppression by the assessees; the related demands and penalties therefore could not survive. The Revenue's challenge was rejected, and the appellate finding allowing credit was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 12 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256649