Modvat credit cannot be denied for technical invoice defects where substantive eligibility is otherwise satisfied.

Modvat credit could not be denied merely because invoices did not correctly state the consignor and consignee particulars or were not in the prescribed form. The Court noted that the defect was technical and, in light of the amendment to Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, such deficiencies did not defeat a substantive credit claim. On that basis, the Revenue's objection was held insufficient, and no substantial question of law was found to arise.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied on the ground that the invoices did not correctly reflect the particulars of the consignor and consignee and were not in the prescribed form.

Analysis: The appeal challenged the Tribunal's decision allowing Modvat credit on a technical objection that the invoices did not fully and correctly state the particulars of the parties. The Court noted that the deficiency in particulars could not defeat the credit claim in view of the amendment to Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. On that basis, the denial of Modvat credit was not justified and no substantial question of law arose for consideration.

Conclusion: The Modvat credit could not be denied on the technical ground raised by the Revenue, and the appeal was not fit for admission.

---