https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104712 A purely procedural defect in invoice endorsement or routing of inputs to a different godown did not justify denial of Modvat credit where both premises belonged to the same registered dealer and the inputs were otherwise received in the assessee's registered premises. The discrepancy arose because the invoices carried the registration number of one godown while the goods were sent to another godown of the same appellant, but this did not affect the substantive entitlement to credit. Modvat credit was therefore admissible. en-us Thu, 28 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Mar 2012 10:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104712 A purely procedural defect in invoice endorsement or routing of inputs to a different godown did not justify denial of Modvat credit where both premises belonged to the same registered dealer and the inputs were otherwise received in the assessee's registered premises. The discrepancy arose because the invoices carried the registration number of one godown while the goods were sent to another godown of the same appellant, but this did not affect the substantive entitlement to credit. Modvat credit was therefore admissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 28 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104712