https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378698 Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because invoices mentioned the dealer registration number instead of the manufacturing unit registration number, where the goods were duty paid, actually received in the factory, properly recorded in statutory books, and used in manufacture. The supplier's mistake was clarified and later rectified, and the defect was treated as a clerical or typographical error. On these facts, denial of credit was unjustified, and the assessee was entitled to the credit with consequential relief. en-us Tue, 05 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Apr 2019 09:29:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378698 Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because invoices mentioned the dealer registration number instead of the manufacturing unit registration number, where the goods were duty paid, actually received in the factory, properly recorded in statutory books, and used in manufacture. The supplier's mistake was clarified and later rectified, and the defect was treated as a clerical or typographical error. On these facts, denial of credit was unjustified, and the assessee was entitled to the credit with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 05 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378698