https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772568 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appellant's appeal against recovery of CENVAT credit. The department alleged paper invoices without actual goods dispatch but failed to provide adequate evidence - obtaining statements from only 70 of 160 vehicle owners, with many statements lacking proper recording procedures under CEA 1944. The appellant provided banking payment records and freight vouchers supporting genuine transactions. The vendor was improperly excluded as co-noticee despite being central to allegations. The department failed to establish suppression of facts required for extended limitation period. The tribunal found proceedings vitiated due to incomplete investigation and violation of natural justice principles. Penalty on director was also set aside. en-us Mon, 09 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jun 2025 08:36:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772568 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appellant's appeal against recovery of CENVAT credit. The department alleged paper invoices without actual goods dispatch but failed to provide adequate evidence - obtaining statements from only 70 of 160 vehicle owners, with many statements lacking proper recording procedures under CEA 1944. The appellant provided banking payment records and freight vouchers supporting genuine transactions. The vendor was improperly excluded as co-noticee despite being central to allegations. The department failed to establish suppression of facts required for extended limitation period. The tribunal found proceedings vitiated due to incomplete investigation and violation of natural justice principles. Penalty on director was also set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 09 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772568