https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106474 Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because the dealer issuing the invoice did not physically receive the goods, where the governing clarification under Rule 57GG permits dealer invoices and prescribed records even for direct movement from the manufacturer to the consuming unit. The document notes that an invoice naming another consignee did not change the substance of the transaction, as the dealer had arranged the supply and the goods were ultimately routed through the job worker to the assessee. On these facts, denial based only on the absence of physical receipt by the dealer was not sustainable, and the credit was treated as admissible. en-us Tue, 06 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:59:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106474 Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because the dealer issuing the invoice did not physically receive the goods, where the governing clarification under Rule 57GG permits dealer invoices and prescribed records even for direct movement from the manufacturer to the consuming unit. The document notes that an invoice naming another consignee did not change the substance of the transaction, as the dealer had arranged the supply and the goods were ultimately routed through the job worker to the assessee. On these facts, denial based only on the absence of physical receipt by the dealer was not sustainable, and the credit was treated as admissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 06 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106474