Modvat credit entitlement upheld where substantive conditions were met despite invoice serial-number defects

Modvat credit could not be denied merely because dealers' invoices lacked pre-printed serial numbers or because the assessee did not show intimation of serial numbers to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner or seek acceptance under Notification No. 64/94-C.E. (N.T.). Where the invoices were issued by registered dealers and the substantive conditions were met, namely duty-paid inputs received in the factory, used in manufacture, and duly declared, the credit remained available. The notification-based requirements were treated as extraneous once entitlement under Rule 57A was otherwise fulfilled.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied on the ground that the dealers' invoices did not bear pre-printed serial numbers and that the assessee had not produced evidence of intimation of serial numbers to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner or applied for acceptance of the invoices under Notification No. 64/94-C.E. (N.T.).

Analysis: The invoices were issued by registered dealers and the substantive conditions for availment of Modvat credit were satisfied, as the inputs were duty-paid, received in the factory, utilized in manufacture, and duly declared. The absence of pre-printed serial numbers was not a valid ground for denial in view of the settled position on the issue. The requirements relating to intimation of serial numbers and acceptance under the notification were treated as extraneous where the substantive entitlement under Rule 57A stood fulfilled.

Conclusion: Modvat credit could not be denied on these grounds, and the assessee was entitled to the credit.

---