https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331681 The appeal was allowed as the appellant correctly took Cenvat Credit on capital goods received, despite the supplier's later suspended registration. The court emphasized that the duty paying documents and statutory records supported the credit claim, and the appellant was not required to verify the supplier's infrastructure. The lack of evidence showing mala fide intention or knowledge on the appellant's part led to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. Additionally, the time-barred demand was rejected due to the absence of wrongdoing and the importance of corroborative evidence in such cases. en-us Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Dec 2016 10:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331681 The appeal was allowed as the appellant correctly took Cenvat Credit on capital goods received, despite the supplier's later suspended registration. The court emphasized that the duty paying documents and statutory records supported the credit claim, and the appellant was not required to verify the supplier's infrastructure. The lack of evidence showing mala fide intention or knowledge on the appellant's part led to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. Additionally, the time-barred demand was rejected due to the absence of wrongdoing and the importance of corroborative evidence in such cases. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331681