Invoice consignee defect does not defeat Modvat credit when actual receipt by the manufacturer is undisputed.

Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because invoices name a loan licensee as consignee instead of the manufacturer, where actual receipt of the goods by the manufacturer is undisputed. The omission in the invoice was treated as a clerical defect and, following the earlier ruling applied by CEGAT, did not by itself disentitle the appellant from credit when the goods had in fact been received. The operative principle is that documentary irregularity in the consignee description does not defeat Modvat benefit in the absence of doubt about receipt.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied merely because the invoices showed the name of the loan licensee as consignee and not the appellant manufacturer, where receipt of the goods by the appellant was not in dispute.

Analysis: The appellant had taken credit on invoices that omitted its name and showed only the loan licensee as consignee. The omission was explained as a mistake, and the factual receipt of the goods by the appellant was not disputed. The Tribunal applied the earlier ruling that such an omission, by itself, does not disentitle a manufacturer from Modvat credit when the goods have actually been received.

Conclusion: Modvat credit could not be denied on this ground, and the issue was decided in favour of the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: An invoice defect as to the consignee's name does not bar Modvat credit where actual receipt of the goods by the manufacturer is established.

---