Modvat credit cannot be denied for a corrected invoice where the goods transaction is genuine and no double supply is alleged.

Modvat credit on capital goods could not be denied merely because the original invoice named the wrong unit and was later corrected and reissued, where the transaction was genuine and there was no allegation of double supply or non-receipt of goods. The corrected invoice was treated as a curable authentication of the same transaction, not a fresh or unauthorised document. The defect was procedural rather than substantive, so entitlement to credit remained intact and the Revenue challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit on capital goods could be denied because the original invoice bore the wrong unit name and was later returned for correction and reissued without prior intimation to the department.

Analysis: The only objection was to the replacement of the invoice showing Unit-I, Salem with a corrected invoice in the name of Unit-II, Rasipuram. There was no allegation of double supply of capital goods or that the goods did not in fact move under the same transaction. The defect was held to be rectifiable, and the corrected invoice was treated as a curative authentication rather than a fresh and unauthorised document. On that basis, the defect was procedural and not a substantive infirmity affecting entitlement to Modvat credit.

Conclusion: Modvat credit could not be denied on the ground of the invoice correction, and the Revenue's challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The order allowing credit was sustained and the Revenue's appeal was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: A corrected invoice addressing a misdescription in the recipient unit, where the transaction and goods are otherwise genuine and there is no allegation of double supply, amounts to a curable defect and does not by itself justify denial of Modvat credit.

---