https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53276 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the original duty-paying documents were later misplaced, where the receipt and use of the inputs and their duty-paid character were not disputed. Credit had been taken on prescribed documents, and the assessees produced photocopies of the bill of entry, transporter records, receipt registers, and other supporting material after the originals were lost. Since Rule 57A read with Rule 57G required duty-paid inputs supported by specified documents, the absence of originals for defacement did not by itself justify disallowance. The credit claim was therefore upheld. en-us Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Jun 2024 21:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53276 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the original duty-paying documents were later misplaced, where the receipt and use of the inputs and their duty-paid character were not disputed. Credit had been taken on prescribed documents, and the assessees produced photocopies of the bill of entry, transporter records, receipt registers, and other supporting material after the originals were lost. Since Rule 57A read with Rule 57G required duty-paid inputs supported by specified documents, the absence of originals for defacement did not by itself justify disallowance. The credit claim was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 20 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53276