Modvat credit allowed despite lost invoices where input receipt, duty-paid character and manufacturing use were undisputed.

Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the original and duplicate invoices were lost in transit, where the assessee produced a certified copy issued by the jurisdictional Superintendent and the department did not dispute receipt of the inputs, their use in manufacture, or their duty-paid character. Although Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Rule 52A(3) contemplate production of the original invoice or, failing that, the duplicate, the Court treated the certified copy as sufficient on these facts and upheld the allowance of credit. It further noted that no substantial question of law arose from the revenue's challenge.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied merely because the original and duplicate invoices were lost in transit and the assessee produced a certified copy issued by the jurisdictional Superintendent, when the receipt of inputs, their use in manufacture, and their duty-paid character were not disputed.

Analysis: Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and the connected invoice procedure under Rule 52A(3) require production of the original invoice and, in its absence, the duplicate. However, where both copies are lost in transit, the absence of strict original documentation does not by itself defeat the credit claim if the department does not dispute receipt of the goods, their use in manufacture of the final product, or the duty-paid character of the inputs. In such circumstances, a certified copy issued by the jurisdictional Superintendent was treated as sufficient, and no error was found in the order allowing credit. The Court further held that no substantial question of law arose from the revenue's challenge.

Conclusion: Modvat credit could not be denied on the facts, and the challenge to the allowance of credit failed.

---