https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755157 Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because invoices carried an incorrect address where the supplier later rectified the error and confirmed the correction, and there was no finding that the goods were not received or that credit had been taken elsewhere. Credit was also admissible on two Bills of Entry rectified by Customs, while the third Bill of Entry was remanded for verification of whether the Head Office had already availed the credit. On the facts recorded, penalty was not warranted and was set aside. en-us Tue, 02 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jul 2024 08:39:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755157 Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because invoices carried an incorrect address where the supplier later rectified the error and confirmed the correction, and there was no finding that the goods were not received or that credit had been taken elsewhere. Credit was also admissible on two Bills of Entry rectified by Customs, while the third Bill of Entry was remanded for verification of whether the Head Office had already availed the credit. On the facts recorded, penalty was not warranted and was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755157