https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103856 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the invoice was issued in the name of a merged unit, where the record showed that the named unit had already merged into the respondent and formed part of the same manufacturing entity. The earlier Tribunal ruling recognising the merger under Rule 57S(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, was applied, and the pendency of a reference application before the High Court was not a valid reason to refuse to follow that decision in the respondent's own case. Credit was therefore correctly allowed, and the Revenue's challenge failed. en-us Mon, 24 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Feb 2012 18:02:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103856 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the invoice was issued in the name of a merged unit, where the record showed that the named unit had already merged into the respondent and formed part of the same manufacturing entity. The earlier Tribunal ruling recognising the merger under Rule 57S(5) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, was applied, and the pendency of a reference application before the High Court was not a valid reason to refuse to follow that decision in the respondent's own case. Credit was therefore correctly allowed, and the Revenue's challenge failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 24 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103856