https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3745 Modvat credit could not be denied for dealer non-registration where the registration requirement was introduced only from 4 July 1994 and later invoices were covered by an extended registration period. Credit also could not be denied for alleged missing invoice particulars when the invoices disclosed no such defect and the allegation was not specifically identified in the notice or order. Credit claimed on invoice Nos. 41 and 42 was disallowed because the trader's invoices and the original invoices materially differed in the description of goods, leaving the identity of the inputs unexplained. The excess-credit issue was remanded for fresh adjudication with an opportunity of hearing. en-us Wed, 24 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3745 Modvat credit could not be denied for dealer non-registration where the registration requirement was introduced only from 4 July 1994 and later invoices were covered by an extended registration period. Credit also could not be denied for alleged missing invoice particulars when the invoices disclosed no such defect and the allegation was not specifically identified in the notice or order. Credit claimed on invoice Nos. 41 and 42 was disallowed because the trader's invoices and the original invoices materially differed in the description of goods, leaving the identity of the inputs unexplained. The excess-credit issue was remanded for fresh adjudication with an opportunity of hearing. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 24 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3745