https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94162 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the Bill of Entry mentioned the office address if the goods were in fact received in the factory, with the factual receipt requiring verification by the authorities. The amendment permitting receipt of goods on the original invoice was treated as clarificatory and retrospective, so denial of credit on that procedural ground was not justified. Credit based on an invoice-cum-challan showing duty particulars and a Rule 173H endorsement was also not barred in law, provided the supporting particulars and gate pass details were verified. The document therefore stresses that documentary defects alone do not defeat credit where the substantive entitlement can be established on verification. en-us Fri, 29 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Nov 2011 15:28:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94162 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the Bill of Entry mentioned the office address if the goods were in fact received in the factory, with the factual receipt requiring verification by the authorities. The amendment permitting receipt of goods on the original invoice was treated as clarificatory and retrospective, so denial of credit on that procedural ground was not justified. Credit based on an invoice-cum-challan showing duty particulars and a Rule 173H endorsement was also not barred in law, provided the supporting particulars and gate pass details were verified. The document therefore stresses that documentary defects alone do not defeat credit where the substantive entitlement can be established on verification. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 29 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94162