https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93596 Modvat credit remained admissible where duty-paid railway inserts were received in the factory and the invoices correctly identified the recipient, even though the tariff heading had been altered between classifications. The altered heading did not change the identity of the inputs for credit purposes, and any alleged manipulation was a separate legal issue. Credit also could not be denied merely because the invoices were endorsed, since the invoices named the appellant as consignee and the goods were cleared directly to it. Clerical or manipulative defects in invoice particulars, by themselves, do not defeat entitlement to credit. en-us Tue, 23 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Nov 2011 15:42:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93596 Modvat credit remained admissible where duty-paid railway inserts were received in the factory and the invoices correctly identified the recipient, even though the tariff heading had been altered between classifications. The altered heading did not change the identity of the inputs for credit purposes, and any alleged manipulation was a separate legal issue. Credit also could not be denied merely because the invoices were endorsed, since the invoices named the appellant as consignee and the goods were cleared directly to it. Clerical or manipulative defects in invoice particulars, by themselves, do not defeat entitlement to credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 23 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93596