https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365063 The appellant availed CENVAT credit for duty paid return goods under Rule 16 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Despite customers not specifying the purpose for return and discrepancies in LR details, the appellant's correlation chart and payment of duty on returned goods justified the credit. The court clarified that Rule 16 does not require customers to specify return purposes, placing responsibility on recipients for handling returned goods. The judgment favored the appellant, overturning the denial of credit and allowing the appeal. en-us Fri, 15 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Aug 2018 13:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365063 The appellant availed CENVAT credit for duty paid return goods under Rule 16 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. Despite customers not specifying the purpose for return and discrepancies in LR details, the appellant's correlation chart and payment of duty on returned goods justified the credit. The court clarified that Rule 16 does not require customers to specify return purposes, placing responsibility on recipients for handling returned goods. The judgment favored the appellant, overturning the denial of credit and allowing the appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 15 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365063