https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112053 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the disputed invoices were treated as dealer's invoices under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The proviso to Rule 57G(2)(i) separately recognises first-stage dealer invoices, second-stage dealer invoices and dealer invoices issued on or before 31 August 1996, while the ineligibility under Rule 57G(2)(ii) applies only to invoices covered by clause (g). Reading clauses (e), (f) and (g) together, the reference to dealer's invoices in clause (g) was confined to invoices other than first-stage and second-stage dealer invoices, effectively third-stage dealer invoices. As the disputed invoices were issued by importers, they did not fall in the ineligible category and remained eligible for credit. en-us Tue, 17 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Apr 2012 14:11:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112053 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the disputed invoices were treated as dealer's invoices under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The proviso to Rule 57G(2)(i) separately recognises first-stage dealer invoices, second-stage dealer invoices and dealer invoices issued on or before 31 August 1996, while the ineligibility under Rule 57G(2)(ii) applies only to invoices covered by clause (g). Reading clauses (e), (f) and (g) together, the reference to dealer's invoices in clause (g) was confined to invoices other than first-stage and second-stage dealer invoices, effectively third-stage dealer invoices. As the disputed invoices were issued by importers, they did not fall in the ineligible category and remained eligible for credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112053