Modvat credit cannot be denied for lack of prior permission where invoice admissibility still requires verification.

Modvat credit could not be denied merely because prior permission of the Assistant Commissioner had not been obtained before re-crediting amounts earlier reversed. The substantive question was whether the supporting invoices were admissible duty-paying documents, and the record showed departmental and supplier verification indicating conformity with prescribed requirements, subject only to a minor discrepancy. The proper course was fresh examination of the invoices' authenticity and admissibility by the Assistant Commissioner before any final disallowance of credit.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit already reversed could be denied solely because prior permission of the Assistant Commissioner was not obtained before re-crediting it, and whether the matter required fresh examination of the admissibility of the invoices.

Analysis: The reversal of credit had initially been directed on the assumption that the invoices were not valid documents, but subsequent verification by the departmental authorities and the supplier indicated that the invoices were in conformity with the prescribed requirements, save for a minor amount. The absence of prior permission before re-crediting was not, by itself, a sufficient ground to deny Modvat credit. The proper course was for the Assistant Commissioner to examine the documents and determine admissibility after verifying their authenticity.

Conclusion: Modvat credit could not be disallowed merely for want of prior permission, and the issue had to be reconsidered by the Assistant Commissioner on verification of the supporting invoices.

Ratio Decidendi: Credit reversal or re-credit cannot be finally denied on a purely procedural lapse when the substantive admissibility of the duty-paying documents has not been examined and verified.

---