https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332271 Cenvat credit on imported capital goods was held admissible where the installation certificate, though not produced within the stipulated time under Notification No. 32/2005-Cus, was later filed during adjudication and showed that the goods were installed and used in the appellant's premises. The customs notification condition could not override the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 in the absence of a corresponding restriction in those Rules. The description of the importer in the import documents also did not defeat entitlement, as the records showed the appellant's connection with the import and that duty-paid goods were received, installed, and put to intended use. en-us Tue, 02 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Feb 2017 16:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332271 Cenvat credit on imported capital goods was held admissible where the installation certificate, though not produced within the stipulated time under Notification No. 32/2005-Cus, was later filed during adjudication and showed that the goods were installed and used in the appellant's premises. The customs notification condition could not override the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 in the absence of a corresponding restriction in those Rules. The description of the importer in the import documents also did not defeat entitlement, as the records showed the appellant's connection with the import and that duty-paid goods were received, installed, and put to intended use. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332271