https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170141 The case involved a dispute over the entitlement of the assessee to claim input credit based on a supplementary invoice issued by their unit. The lower appellate authority allowed the input credit, ruling that as there was no sale but a transfer of goods between units, the respondent could claim credit under Rule 9(1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Member (J) upheld this decision, finding no suppression of facts by the respondent, and referencing a Karnataka High Court decision. Consequently, the impugned order was affirmed, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. en-us Wed, 15 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 May 2015 11:49:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170141 The case involved a dispute over the entitlement of the assessee to claim input credit based on a supplementary invoice issued by their unit. The lower appellate authority allowed the input credit, ruling that as there was no sale but a transfer of goods between units, the respondent could claim credit under Rule 9(1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Member (J) upheld this decision, finding no suppression of facts by the respondent, and referencing a Karnataka High Court decision. Consequently, the impugned order was affirmed, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 15 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170141