https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185200 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because dealer invoices were handwritten rather than pre-printed, where the substantive requirements of law were otherwise satisfied. The denial rested only on a procedural objection under Notification No. 23/95-CE(NT), but the Tribunal accepted the consistent view that a mere procedural lapse, without failure of the substantive conditions for credit, is not a sufficient basis to refuse Modvat credit. Interference with the order allowing credit was therefore unwarranted. en-us Thu, 01 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Aug 2016 17:11:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185200 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because dealer invoices were handwritten rather than pre-printed, where the substantive requirements of law were otherwise satisfied. The denial rested only on a procedural objection under Notification No. 23/95-CE(NT), but the Tribunal accepted the consistent view that a mere procedural lapse, without failure of the substantive conditions for credit, is not a sufficient basis to refuse Modvat credit. Interference with the order allowing credit was therefore unwarranted. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 01 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185200