Modvat credit cannot be denied for curable invoice defects when receipt and use of goods are established.

Procedural defects in duty-paying invoices did not justify denial of Modvat credit where the goods were identified, had reached the factory, and were used in manufacture. The absence of dealer registration at the time of invoice, and omissions such as mode of transport, value of consignments, and time of removal, were treated as curable irregularities affecting form rather than substantive eligibility. Credit was therefore admissible because the defects did not undermine the underlying entitlement.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied on invoices that were irregular for want of registration of the dealer and for omission of particulars such as the mode of transport and the value of consignments.

Analysis: The invoices were found to suffer from defects prescribed in the relevant trade notice, but the defects were treated as procedural and not going to the substance of the credit claim. The dealer had subsequently been registered, the Board had clarified that unregistered dealers later registered would be accepted up to 31-12-1994, and there was no dispute that the goods had actually reached the factory and were used in manufacture. The missing particulars were considered intended to prevent misuse of invoices, not to create an absolute bar where receipt and use of goods were otherwise established. The omission of the time of removal was also treated as a defect capable of being remedied.

Conclusion: Modvat credit could not be denied for these minor and curable lapses, and the assessee was entitled to the credit claimed.

Ratio Decidendi: Procedural defects in duty-paying invoices do not justify denial of Modvat credit where the identity, receipt, and use of the goods are established and the omission does not affect the substantive eligibility to credit.

---