https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105623 Modvat credit could not be denied solely because the Bill of Entry showed the address of another unit of the same assessee, where the recipient manufacturer was identifiable and the inputs were claimed to have been received and used in the credit-taking factory. The scheme's recordkeeping under RG 23A Part I was treated as enabling departmental verification of receipt, storage and utilisation in the user unit. Earlier Tribunal decisions were noted to support credit where the Bill of Entry named a different unit, head office, or related address, so long as the actual recipient and use of inputs were established. Credit remained subject to verification of physical receipt in the user factory. en-us Tue, 22 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Mar 2012 16:20:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105623 Modvat credit could not be denied solely because the Bill of Entry showed the address of another unit of the same assessee, where the recipient manufacturer was identifiable and the inputs were claimed to have been received and used in the credit-taking factory. The scheme's recordkeeping under RG 23A Part I was treated as enabling departmental verification of receipt, storage and utilisation in the user unit. Earlier Tribunal decisions were noted to support credit where the Bill of Entry named a different unit, head office, or related address, so long as the actual recipient and use of inputs were established. Credit remained subject to verification of physical receipt in the user factory. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105623