𝗖𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗧 𝗖𝗵𝗲𝗻𝗻𝗮𝗶 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻 𝗖𝗲𝗻𝘃𝗮𝘁 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗱𝗶𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗔𝗱𝘃𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗨𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗦𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗧𝗮𝘅 📢 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗧𝗿𝗶𝗯𝘂𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗵𝗲𝗹𝗱: "Cenvat Credit cannot be denied for lack of signatures on computer-generated invoices. However, Service Tax demand on advances was upheld due to lack of evidence supporting their refundable nature."

🔍 𝗙𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘀: 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀: M/s. Cable Vision vs. The Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax 𝗜𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲: CENVAT credit denial: unsigned invoices/photocopies; Service tax on advances? 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗶𝘁𝘆: The appellant claimed CENVAT Credit but was denied due to unsigned invoices. Additionally, a demand for Service Tax on advances was contested, asserting they were refundable deposits.

⚖️ 𝗝𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁: The Tribunal ruled that CENVAT credit cannot be denied due to unsigned computer-generated invoices or photocopies. However, the appellant failed to prove advances were refundable deposits, so the Service Tax demand on advances was upheld. Penalties were set aside as the appellant acted in bona fide doubt. Appeal partly allowed.

𝗖𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝗜𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻: 𝗧𝗶𝘁𝗹𝗲: M/s. Cable Vision vs. The Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax 𝗢𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗲: 27 February 2023 📜 This ruling highlights that procedural shortcomings, like unsigned invoices, cannot deny CENVAT Credit, but claims regarding refundable deposits require proper documentation to avoid tax liability.