TaxTMI Login
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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether an endorsement on a certificate issued in lieu of gate pass rendered the duty paying document invalid for availing Modvat credit; (ii) whether late receipt of the certificate in lieu of gate pass, after receipt of the inputs, disentitled the assessee from taking Modvat credit.
Issue (i): Whether an endorsement on a certificate issued in lieu of gate pass rendered the duty paying document invalid for availing Modvat credit.
Analysis: The certificate showed the assessee as consignee, the supplier as consignor, and contained the relevant particulars of the gate pass. The endorsement on the reverse side was neither necessary nor warranted and was only superfluous. In light of the factual position and the Tribunal's earlier view that such an endorsement does not affect the character of a prescribed duty paying document, the document remained valid for Modvat purposes.
Conclusion: The endorsement did not make the certificate invalid for availing Modvat credit.
Issue (ii): Whether late receipt of the certificate in lieu of gate pass, after receipt of the inputs, disentitled the assessee from taking Modvat credit.
Analysis: The inputs had been received and entered in the statutory records, while credit was taken only after the certificate was actually received. Rule 57G(2) did not require the document to accompany the inputs at the time of receipt, and the prescribed document having been received later, the credit could not be denied merely on the ground of delayed receipt. The cited Tribunal decisions supported this position.
Conclusion: Late receipt of the certificate did not invalidate the claim to Modvat credit.
Final Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to Modvat credit and the disallowance made by the lower authority could not stand.
Ratio Decidendi: For Modvat credit, a prescribed duty paying document need not accompany the inputs at the time of receipt if credit is taken only after the document is received, and a mere superfluous endorsement on such document does not render it invalid.
TaxTMI 
