TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>MODVAT Credit Upheld Despite Invoice Discrepancies</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Central Excise Versus Goyal M.G. Gases Ltd.</h3> Commissioner of Central Excise Versus Goyal M.G. Gases Ltd. - TMI Issues involved: Availability of MODVAT Credit on the strength of invoices not in the name of the appellant.Analysis:The issue in this appeal revolved around the availability of MODVAT Credit of duty to the appellant based on invoices not in their name. The Tribunal examined the situation where the invoices were in the name of a different entity than the appellant. The Commissioner (Appeals) had previously found that despite the discrepancy in the consignee's address, the invoices were authenticated by the same person who prepared them, and the address was changed from Kota to Ghaziabad. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision where it was established that as long as there was no dispute regarding the receipt and utilization of inputs covered by the invoice, and the appellant did not benefit at both units, a mere incorrectness in the address did not warrant denial of credit. The Tribunal concurred with the Commissioner (Appeals) and held that the MODVAT Credit could not be denied solely on the basis of a change in address. Additionally, in another instance where the buyer's name differed from the consignee, the Commissioner (Appeals) accepted a certificate from the buyer confirming the supply to the appellant at a different address. The Tribunal cited a precedent where it was determined that credit could not be denied based on invoices favoring a branch office if the goods were received at the factory. Furthermore, it was noted that the inputs were duty-paid and received for use in manufacturing final products. Considering a subsequent amendment and a circular clarifying procedural lapses, the Tribunal rejected the appeal filed by the Revenue, emphasizing that minor procedural issues should not hinder the availability of MODVAT Credit.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the availability of MODVAT Credit to the appellant despite discrepancies in the invoices, emphasizing the importance of actual receipt and utilization of inputs in the manufacturing process over minor procedural lapses.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
