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 solely because the manufacturers' invoice did not bear pre-printed serial numbers as required by Rule 52A(6) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.
Analysis: Rule 52A(6) was treated as mandatory in form, and Rule 57G required that the credit be supported by an invoice issued in accordance with Rule 52A. However, the defect in the invoice was procedural and did not affect the fact that duty had been paid on the goods, which was certified by the jurisdictional authorities. The department had not treated such defective invoices as rendering the goods non-duty-paid or demanded duty again from the manufacturer. In those circumstances, denial of Modvat credit to the buyer manufacturer was held to be unwarranted. The doctrine of caveat emptor and the removed proviso to Rule 57G(2) did not justify denial of credit on these facts.
Conclusion: Modvat credit could not be denied solely on the ground that the invoice lacked pre-printed serial numbers.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the assessee was entitled to consequential relief.
Ratio Decidendi: A procedural defect in the duty-paying invoice does not justify denial of Modvat credit where the payment of duty on the goods is otherwise established and the goods are not treated as non-duty-paid.