https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2348 Cenvat credit was held inadmissible where the invoices described scrap different from the goods actually received, because credit is available only on duty-paid inputs actually received and used in manufacture. The deliberate misdescription of goods, coupled with the assessee's knowledge of the mismatch, amounted to suppression with intent to evade duty, so the extended limitation period was correctly invoked. Penalty on the assessee was upheld but reduced as excessive, while ancillary penalties on the other noticees were set aside because the conditions for those penalties were not met. The additional credit disallowed by the Commissioner was also sustained. en-us Tue, 12 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Aug 2018 18:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2348 Cenvat credit was held inadmissible where the invoices described scrap different from the goods actually received, because credit is available only on duty-paid inputs actually received and used in manufacture. The deliberate misdescription of goods, coupled with the assessee's knowledge of the mismatch, amounted to suppression with intent to evade duty, so the extended limitation period was correctly invoked. Penalty on the assessee was upheld but reduced as excessive, while ancillary penalties on the other noticees were set aside because the conditions for those penalties were not met. The additional credit disallowed by the Commissioner was also sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 12 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2348