https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93594 Modvat credit was treated as admissible where endorsed subsidiary certificates continued to evidence entitlement, invoices named another purchaser but identified the assessee as the consignee, and later registration proof showed the dealer was registered. The analysis emphasises that substantive receipt of goods and supporting documentary evidence prevailed over procedural objections about endorsement history, invoice nomenclature, or alleged absence of dealer registration. On each ground, the credit claim was upheld because the surrounding records established eligibility. en-us Mon, 22 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:23:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93594 Modvat credit was treated as admissible where endorsed subsidiary certificates continued to evidence entitlement, invoices named another purchaser but identified the assessee as the consignee, and later registration proof showed the dealer was registered. The analysis emphasises that substantive receipt of goods and supporting documentary evidence prevailed over procedural objections about endorsement history, invoice nomenclature, or alleged absence of dealer registration. On each ground, the credit claim was upheld because the surrounding records established eligibility. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 22 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93594