Modvat credit on invoice copy accepted where an ink tick mark, not a carbon mark, did not undermine genuineness.

Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the invoice copy used for credit bore an ink tick mark instead of a carbon tick mark. The invoice particulars were otherwise consistent, and there was no rule requiring the duplicate and other copies to be carbon copies of the original; a defect in the carbon paper could explain the difference. On these facts, the documentary discrepancy was insufficient to reject the duplicate invoice, and the credit was held admissible.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied on the ground that the invoice copy used for credit bore an ink tick mark instead of a carbon tick mark, and was therefore not a genuine duplicate copy.

Analysis: The invoice particulars were otherwise consistent, and the absence of a carbon tick mark on the duplicate copy was treated as an insufficient basis to reject it as a duplicate. It was held that there was no rule requiring the duplicate and other copies to be carbon copies of the original, and a defect in the carbon paper could explain the difference in the mark. On these facts, the documentary discrepancy did not justify denial of the credit.

Conclusion: The objection to the duplicate invoice was rejected, and the assessee's Modvat credit was held admissible.

---