https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373072 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the denial of Cenvat Credit to the manufacturer based on supplementary invoices. It was held that the appellant did not engage in suppression or collusion, as the invoices were from government undertakings. The confusion regarding the application of Rule 9(1)(b) in pending cases and the absence of fraud led to the decision in favor of the appellant, who was entitled to claim the credit as per previous Tribunal decisions. en-us Tue, 13 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Jan 2019 12:18:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373072 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the denial of Cenvat Credit to the manufacturer based on supplementary invoices. It was held that the appellant did not engage in suppression or collusion, as the invoices were from government undertakings. The confusion regarding the application of Rule 9(1)(b) in pending cases and the absence of fraud led to the decision in favor of the appellant, who was entitled to claim the credit as per previous Tribunal decisions. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 13 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373072