Modvat credit cannot be denied for non-production of originals when duty paying documents were already resumed by the department.

Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because original duty paying documents were not produced for defacement where the department had already resumed those documents and photocopies were available. In such circumstances, the existence of the duty paid inputs is sufficiently established, and non-production of the originals for defacement does not justify rejection of credit. The operative legal point is that procedural inability to produce originals, when attributable to departmental custody of the documents, is not a valid ground to refuse Modvat credit.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied solely because the original duty paying documents were not produced for defacement when the documents had been resumed by the department.

Analysis: The record showed that the original inputs duty paying documents were resumed by the Central Excise officials and that photocopies of the relevant documents were available. On that basis, the existence of the duty paying documents stood established. The inability to produce the originals for defacement, in these circumstances, did not justify denial of credit.

Conclusion: Modvat credit could not be denied merely for non-production of the original duty paying documents, and the denial was unsustainable.

---