https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117345 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the customs declaration on the imported goods was overwritten or retyped to reflect the appellant as buyer. The inputs were duty paid at import, purchased from the importer, received in the appellant's factory and consumed there, and the record showed that the importer had not availed, and would not avail, Modvat credit or refund. The earlier intended buyer also had not taken credit on the same Bills of Entry. On these facts, the alteration was treated as a commercial change in the consignee's identity and not as evidence of double availment of credit. The appellant was therefore entitled to credit. en-us Wed, 14 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Jun 2012 18:38:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117345 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the customs declaration on the imported goods was overwritten or retyped to reflect the appellant as buyer. The inputs were duty paid at import, purchased from the importer, received in the appellant's factory and consumed there, and the record showed that the importer had not availed, and would not avail, Modvat credit or refund. The earlier intended buyer also had not taken credit on the same Bills of Entry. On these facts, the alteration was treated as a commercial change in the consignee's identity and not as evidence of double availment of credit. The appellant was therefore entitled to credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 14 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117345