https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105621 Modvat credit cannot be denied for a merely formal defect where the invoice endorsement was rubber stamped rather than printed, if the practice was otherwise verified and accepted and the underlying entitlement was unaffected. The absence of a declaration that no refund of countervailing duty had been claimed on imported goods was treated as a technical procedural omission, because the fact could be verified by the authorities and the declaration could be furnished if required. The credit claim was therefore not defeated by either defect, and the Revenue challenge failed on all material grounds. en-us Tue, 22 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Mar 2012 16:13:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105621 Modvat credit cannot be denied for a merely formal defect where the invoice endorsement was rubber stamped rather than printed, if the practice was otherwise verified and accepted and the underlying entitlement was unaffected. The absence of a declaration that no refund of countervailing duty had been claimed on imported goods was treated as a technical procedural omission, because the fact could be verified by the authorities and the declaration could be furnished if required. The credit claim was therefore not defeated by either defect, and the Revenue challenge failed on all material grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105621