https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353742 Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because invoices were alleged to be fake or parallel where receipt of goods was not disproved. The Tribunal accepted that discrepancies such as vehicle numbers or timing mismatches, without shortages at the consignee end, were insufficient to reject credit when payments were made through banking channels and the transaction was bona fide. It also held that the buyer was not required to verify whether the supplier had discharged duty, and denial of credit again on the same goods would amount to double taxation. The order allowing credit was upheld. en-us Tue, 19 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Jan 2018 07:53:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353742 Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because invoices were alleged to be fake or parallel where receipt of goods was not disproved. The Tribunal accepted that discrepancies such as vehicle numbers or timing mismatches, without shortages at the consignee end, were insufficient to reject credit when payments were made through banking channels and the transaction was bona fide. It also held that the buyer was not required to verify whether the supplier had discharged duty, and denial of credit again on the same goods would amount to double taxation. The order allowing credit was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 19 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353742