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 was admissible where duty-paid inputs were sent through a job worker for slitting and repacking and received by the manufacturer under endorsed gate passes, despite the goods not being received in the original packing.
Analysis: The decisive factors were that the inputs had already suffered duty, the duty-paying documents accompanied the goods, and the processed inputs remained the same commodity in reduced form. The source of receipt was held not to be material where the nexus between the duty-paid input and the final product was established. The change in weight and form caused by slitting did not destroy the identity of the goods, and endorsement by the job worker was treated as sufficient to establish continuity of identity. The cited trade notice and the prior appellate ruling supported the view that Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because the inputs were received through a job worker rather than directly from the supplier.
Conclusion: Modvat credit was admissible and the objection to its availment was rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: Modvat credit cannot be denied where duty-paid inputs retain their identity after processing through a job worker and the duty-paid documents establish the nexus between the input received and the final product, even if the inputs are not received directly from the supplier in original packing.