Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 on the ground that the invoices described delivery at Varanasi and did not mention the vehicle details on the face of the invoices, when the invoices were issued by a registered dealer and were accompanied by challans containing the transport particulars.
Analysis: The invoices related to inputs issued by a registered dealer from his registered premises and were accompanied by challans showing the relevant challan numbers and vehicle number. The inputs were received in the factory under cover of regular invoices, and the invoices satisfied the requirements applicable to invoices issued by a registered dealer under Rule 57GG of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The requirement of mentioning the method of transport and vehicle number on the invoice applied to manufacturer's invoices under Rule 52A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and not to the present invoices governed by Rule 57GG.
Conclusion: Denial of Modvat credit was unjustified, and the assessee was entitled to the credit.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a registered dealer's invoice issued under Rule 57GG of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 contains the particulars required by that rule and is supported by challans, credit cannot be denied merely because the invoice does not contain transport details required only for manufacturer's invoices under Rule 52A.