Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied merely because the inputs were sent to the job workers without first being received in the factory, where the assessee had filed the requisite declaration under Notification No. 84/94-C.E. and the invoices named the assessee as buyer with the job workers shown as consignees.
Analysis: The declaration filed under the notification specifically covered supply of raw material to job workers without bringing the goods into the factory as well as after bringing them into the factory, and no objection had been raised by the Revenue to that declaration. The invoices were issued in the assessee's name and showed the job workers as consignees. The Board's circular dated 12-9-95 permitted direct supply of inputs to job workers under such arrangements and treated the duplicate copy of the manufacturer's invoice as sufficient for transport and availment of Modvat credit by the input user.
Conclusion: The denial of Modvat credit was unsustainable and the assessee was entitled to the benefit of credit.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the governing notification and the applicable Board circular permit direct dispatch of inputs to a job worker, and the prescribed declaration and invoicing particulars are in place, Modvat credit cannot be denied solely because the inputs were not first brought into the manufacturer's factory.