Modvat Credit on Transit Sales: manufacturer's invoice with prescribed particulars was sufficient, despite no physical receipt at dealer premises.

Modvat credit could not be denied merely because goods sold in transit were not physically received at the dealer's premises, where the manufacturer's invoice named the assessee as consignee and contained the particulars required under Notification No. 15/94. The Board's clarification treated a direct despatch under the manufacturer's invoice as sufficient, and a separate invoice from the registered person was not necessary for credit availment. On that basis, the manufacturer's invoice was accepted as a valid document under Rule 57G, physical receipt at the dealer's premises was held immaterial, and denial of Modvat credit was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied merely because the goods sold in transit were not physically received at the dealer's premises, when the manufacturer's invoice showed the assessee as consignee and contained the prescribed particulars.

Analysis: The Board's clarification on transit sale provided that where goods are despatched directly under a manufacturer's invoice containing the required particulars, the registered person's separate invoice is not necessary for availment of Modvat credit. The manufacturer's invoice in this case showed the assessee as consignee and satisfied the particulars prescribed under Notification No. 15/94. On that basis, the document was treated as a valid document under Rule 57G, and physical receipt of the goods at the dealer's premises was held immaterial so long as the despatch document met the clarified requirements.

Conclusion: The denial of Modvat credit was not sustainable, and the assessee was entitled to relief.

---