https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382500 CENVAT credit taken on invoice basis without actual receipt of inputs was held inadmissible where the claimant admitted such availment and offered no credible rebuttal. The burden under Rule 9(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was not discharged, as no contemporaneous records, police complaint, or other evidence supported the plea of pilferage or mud deposition. The shortage valuation was also left unrebutted, and the natural justice objection failed because opportunity to reply and be heard had been provided. On these facts, the confirmation of duty, interest and penalties was upheld. en-us Wed, 09 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Jul 2019 06:05:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382500 CENVAT credit taken on invoice basis without actual receipt of inputs was held inadmissible where the claimant admitted such availment and offered no credible rebuttal. The burden under Rule 9(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was not discharged, as no contemporaneous records, police complaint, or other evidence supported the plea of pilferage or mud deposition. The shortage valuation was also left unrebutted, and the natural justice objection failed because opportunity to reply and be heard had been provided. On these facts, the confirmation of duty, interest and penalties was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 09 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382500