https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35032 Cenvat credit on additional duty paid on inputs could not be denied for the period 1-4-2000 to 28-8-2000 merely because the credit was supported by supplementary invoices and differential duty certificates. The inputs had been received under prescribed invoices and were used in the manufacture of final products, so the substantive conditions for availment were satisfied. The absence of an express procedural provision in the new rules for that period did not defeat entitlement to credit. The earlier differential duty certificate requirement was procedural only and could not override established factual compliance. Credit was therefore admissible. en-us Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35032 Cenvat credit on additional duty paid on inputs could not be denied for the period 1-4-2000 to 28-8-2000 merely because the credit was supported by supplementary invoices and differential duty certificates. The inputs had been received under prescribed invoices and were used in the manufacture of final products, so the substantive conditions for availment were satisfied. The absence of an express procedural provision in the new rules for that period did not defeat entitlement to credit. The earlier differential duty certificate requirement was procedural only and could not override established factual compliance. Credit was therefore admissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35032