https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343829 The appeal was partly allowed in a case involving the rejection of CENVAT credit based on improper invoices. The Judicial Member upheld the rejection of credit based on photocopies of invoices but allowed the credit taken on invoices addressed to the appellant's sister concern. The Member distinguished between impermissible practices and technical lapses, recognizing the appellant's position regarding the invoices not being directly addressed to them. The appeal resulted in a partial success for the appellant, emphasizing the importance of proper documentation for availing CENVAT credit. en-us Fri, 07 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Jun 2017 06:18:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343829 The appeal was partly allowed in a case involving the rejection of CENVAT credit based on improper invoices. The Judicial Member upheld the rejection of credit based on photocopies of invoices but allowed the credit taken on invoices addressed to the appellant's sister concern. The Member distinguished between impermissible practices and technical lapses, recognizing the appellant's position regarding the invoices not being directly addressed to them. The appeal resulted in a partial success for the appellant, emphasizing the importance of proper documentation for availing CENVAT credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343829