Modvat credit cannot be denied for a consignee's name on the invoice reverse when receipt of duty-paid inputs is undisputed.

Modvat credit could not be denied where duty-paid inputs were shown in the invoice and supplier documents as delivered under a job worker arrangement, and the assessee was identified as consignee. The Revenue's only objection was that the appellant's name appeared on the reverse of the invoice rather than on its face. The Tribunal treated that placement as immaterial because receipt of the goods was not disputed and the documents supported the consignee status. Credit was therefore allowed on the principle that Modvat benefit cannot be refused merely on such a technical objection.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied merely because the appellant's name appeared as consignee on the reverse of the invoice rather than on its face.

Analysis: The invoice and the supplier's certificate showed that the inputs were issued to the job worker arrangement and delivered to the appellant as consignee. The only objection taken by the Revenue was the placement of the consignee's name on the reverse of the invoice, while receipt of duty-paid goods was not disputed. The Tribunal relied on its earlier view that where the assessee's name is shown as consignee or customer in the documents, the benefit of Modvat credit cannot be denied on that ground alone.

Conclusion: Modvat credit could not be denied on the sole ground that the appellant's name was shown as consignee on the reverse of the invoice; the appeal succeeded.

---