https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94537 Modvat credit could not be denied where duty-paid inputs were shown in the invoice and supplier documents as delivered under a job worker arrangement, and the assessee was identified as consignee. The Revenue's only objection was that the appellant's name appeared on the reverse of the invoice rather than on its face. The Tribunal treated that placement as immaterial because receipt of the goods was not disputed and the documents supported the consignee status. Credit was therefore allowed on the principle that Modvat benefit cannot be refused merely on such a technical objection. en-us Wed, 19 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Nov 2011 12:16:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94537 Modvat credit could not be denied where duty-paid inputs were shown in the invoice and supplier documents as delivered under a job worker arrangement, and the assessee was identified as consignee. The Revenue's only objection was that the appellant's name appeared on the reverse of the invoice rather than on its face. The Tribunal treated that placement as immaterial because receipt of the goods was not disputed and the documents supported the consignee status. Credit was therefore allowed on the principle that Modvat benefit cannot be refused merely on such a technical objection. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 19 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94537