Modvat credit on original dealer invoices remained valid; later duplicate-copy requirement could not defeat credit already taken.

Modvat credit was admissible on the strength of original invoices issued by a registered dealer where the invoices contained the prescribed particulars under Notification No. 32/94-C.E. (N.T.) and Rule 57GG. The later requirement that credit be supported only by a duplicate copy was introduced by Notification No. 2/95-C.E. (N.T.) with effect from 19-1-1995, and could not be applied retrospectively to deny credit already lawfully taken. The credit was therefore rightly availed and not deniable on the ground of absence of duplicate copies.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit was admissible where the respondent had taken credit on the strength of original invoices issued by a registered dealer before the amendment requiring duplicate copies.

Analysis: Notification No. 32/94-C.E. (N.T.) and Rule 57GG of the Central Excise Rules permitted credit on invoices issued by registered dealers containing the prescribed particulars, and did not require that credit be taken only on a duplicate copy. That requirement was introduced only by Notification No. 2/95-C.E. (N.T.) with effect from 19-1-1995. Since the credit in question had been taken before that amendment, it could not be disallowed on the ground that the invoices were not duplicate copies. The Tribunal followed the earlier view that the later procedural requirement could not be applied to deny credit already lawfully availed under the then existing rule.

Conclusion: Modvat credit was rightly availed and was not deniable to the respondent.

---