https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350273 CENVAT credit could not be denied merely because broadcasting invoices were routed through an intermediary where the documents, read together, showed that service tax had been paid on the broadcasting service. The dispute concerned only a documentary discrepancy, not the underlying tax payment, and the CENVAT Credit Rules, read with the relevant circular and the proviso to Rule 9(2), allowed verification of accounts in such intermediary-based advertising arrangements. Decisions on identical facts also supported the claim. Denial of credit was therefore unjustified, and the assessee was entitled to avail the credit. en-us Mon, 23 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Jan 2018 10:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350273 CENVAT credit could not be denied merely because broadcasting invoices were routed through an intermediary where the documents, read together, showed that service tax had been paid on the broadcasting service. The dispute concerned only a documentary discrepancy, not the underlying tax payment, and the CENVAT Credit Rules, read with the relevant circular and the proviso to Rule 9(2), allowed verification of accounts in such intermediary-based advertising arrangements. Decisions on identical facts also supported the claim. Denial of credit was therefore unjustified, and the assessee was entitled to avail the credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 23 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350273