https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352431 Cenvat credit taken on inputs was treated as irregular because the invoice description did not match the actual processed goods supplied by the dealer, and the assessee had already reversed the credit with interest after admitting the mistake. The demand was sustained. Penalties on the assessee and its Director were set aside because the record did not show suppression of facts or deliberate evasion, and the assessee acted under a bona fide belief that the credit was admissible and that the dealer had followed the procedure. The decision therefore sustained the credit demand but deleted the penal consequences. en-us Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Dec 2017 08:36:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352431 Cenvat credit taken on inputs was treated as irregular because the invoice description did not match the actual processed goods supplied by the dealer, and the assessee had already reversed the credit with interest after admitting the mistake. The demand was sustained. Penalties on the assessee and its Director were set aside because the record did not show suppression of facts or deliberate evasion, and the assessee acted under a bona fide belief that the credit was admissible and that the dealer had followed the procedure. The decision therefore sustained the credit demand but deleted the penal consequences. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352431