https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174030 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the accounting entry was completed after six months where the inputs had been received within time and the initial credit entry was made within the prescribed period. The Tribunal treated the later delay as arising from correction of the supplier's invoice, including an address-description defect, and held that Rule 57G(2) bars only the commencement of credit-taking after six months, not the completion of the accounting process when substantive compliance is otherwise shown. Because receipt of inputs, duty payment, eligibility, and use in manufacture were undisputed, the minor documentary discrepancy did not defeat the credit. Modvat credit was therefore admissible. en-us Tue, 04 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Jul 2016 10:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174030 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the accounting entry was completed after six months where the inputs had been received within time and the initial credit entry was made within the prescribed period. The Tribunal treated the later delay as arising from correction of the supplier's invoice, including an address-description defect, and held that Rule 57G(2) bars only the commencement of credit-taking after six months, not the completion of the accounting process when substantive compliance is otherwise shown. Because receipt of inputs, duty payment, eligibility, and use in manufacture were undisputed, the minor documentary discrepancy did not defeat the credit. Modvat credit was therefore admissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 04 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174030