https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89198 The appeal challenged a demand for inadmissible modvat credit due to discrepancies in supplier information on subsidiary gate passes. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the decision, stating the goods could not be identified. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, emphasizing the validity of subsidiary gate passes for modvat credit, even if the actual supplier differed. The Tribunal required evidence of goods flow through an intermediary, which was satisfied in this case. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, granting the appellants relief. en-us Tue, 15 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Sep 2011 10:40:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89198 The appeal challenged a demand for inadmissible modvat credit due to discrepancies in supplier information on subsidiary gate passes. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the decision, stating the goods could not be identified. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, emphasizing the validity of subsidiary gate passes for modvat credit, even if the actual supplier differed. The Tribunal required evidence of goods flow through an intermediary, which was satisfied in this case. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, granting the appellants relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 15 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89198