https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263140 MODVAT credit was held not deniable merely because the triplicate copy of the bill of entry was later misplaced for defacement, where the inputs had already been received in the factory under valid supporting documents. Rule 57G(3) required receipt of inputs under specified documents, but the factual findings showed that the goods were duty-paid, their intended use was undisputed, and the assessee produced the exchange control copy from the bank, other records, and an indemnity bond. As receipt and proper initial credit were not disputed, the absence of the triplicate copy at a later stage did not defeat the credit claim. en-us Tue, 25 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Jan 2016 10:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263140 MODVAT credit was held not deniable merely because the triplicate copy of the bill of entry was later misplaced for defacement, where the inputs had already been received in the factory under valid supporting documents. Rule 57G(3) required receipt of inputs under specified documents, but the factual findings showed that the goods were duty-paid, their intended use was undisputed, and the assessee produced the exchange control copy from the bank, other records, and an indemnity bond. As receipt and proper initial credit were not disputed, the absence of the triplicate copy at a later stage did not defeat the credit claim. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 25 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263140