https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87261 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the input goods were not re-endorsed with the vehicle number, since the lapse was only procedural. The goods were received in the ordinary course of business, and there was no allegation or finding of misuse, non-receipt at the factory, or serious breach of law or rule. As the objection concerned only a technical endorsement defect by the local Superintendent, the tribunal held that such a procedural irregularity could not defeat substantive credit entitlement. The appellant was therefore entitled to Modvat credit, and the objection based on non-endorsement of the vehicle number was rejected. en-us Thu, 28 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Sep 2011 17:37:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87261 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the input goods were not re-endorsed with the vehicle number, since the lapse was only procedural. The goods were received in the ordinary course of business, and there was no allegation or finding of misuse, non-receipt at the factory, or serious breach of law or rule. As the objection concerned only a technical endorsement defect by the local Superintendent, the tribunal held that such a procedural irregularity could not defeat substantive credit entitlement. The appellant was therefore entitled to Modvat credit, and the objection based on non-endorsement of the vehicle number was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 28 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87261