https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408983 The Tribunal allowed the appeal by the steel products manufacturer, holding that the Cenvat credit on supplementary invoices for the differential duty paid on stock transfers could not be denied. The Tribunal found no suppression or misstatement, referencing Rule 9(1)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules and a Karnataka High Court judgment. It concluded that the issue was settled and that the denial of Cenvat credit was unwarranted, resulting in setting aside of the impugned orders and granting relief to the appellant. en-us Wed, 09 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Jun 2021 07:51:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408983 The Tribunal allowed the appeal by the steel products manufacturer, holding that the Cenvat credit on supplementary invoices for the differential duty paid on stock transfers could not be denied. The Tribunal found no suppression or misstatement, referencing Rule 9(1)(b) of Cenvat Credit Rules and a Karnataka High Court judgment. It concluded that the issue was settled and that the denial of Cenvat credit was unwarranted, resulting in setting aside of the impugned orders and granting relief to the appellant. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 09 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408983