https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347502 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD ruled that the appellant's Cenvat credit on capital goods, based on a pro-forma invoice, was inadmissible as it was not a prescribed document under Rule 9 of the CCR, 2004. The appeal against the Order-in-Original was dismissed on this ground. However, the Tribunal allowed the appellant to avail the benefit of discharging 25% of the penalty imposed, subject to meeting specified conditions under the Finance Act, 1994, and Rule 15 of the CCR, 2004. Compliance with prescribed documents for Cenvat credit and potential penalty reduction under specific provisions were emphasized in the judgment. en-us Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Sep 2017 09:37:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347502 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD ruled that the appellant's Cenvat credit on capital goods, based on a pro-forma invoice, was inadmissible as it was not a prescribed document under Rule 9 of the CCR, 2004. The appeal against the Order-in-Original was dismissed on this ground. However, the Tribunal allowed the appellant to avail the benefit of discharging 25% of the penalty imposed, subject to meeting specified conditions under the Finance Act, 1994, and Rule 15 of the CCR, 2004. Compliance with prescribed documents for Cenvat credit and potential penalty reduction under specific provisions were emphasized in the judgment. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347502