https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108327 Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because invoices name a loan licensee as consignee instead of the manufacturer, where actual receipt of the goods by the manufacturer is undisputed. The omission in the invoice was treated as a clerical defect and, following the earlier ruling applied by CEGAT, did not by itself disentitle the appellant from credit when the goods had in fact been received. The operative principle is that documentary irregularity in the consignee description does not defeat Modvat benefit in the absence of doubt about receipt. en-us Thu, 07 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Mar 2012 18:55:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108327 Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because invoices name a loan licensee as consignee instead of the manufacturer, where actual receipt of the goods by the manufacturer is undisputed. The omission in the invoice was treated as a clerical defect and, following the earlier ruling applied by CEGAT, did not by itself disentitle the appellant from credit when the goods had in fact been received. The operative principle is that documentary irregularity in the consignee description does not defeat Modvat benefit in the absence of doubt about receipt. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 07 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108327