https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53408 Minor defects in an invoice do not by themselves disentitle Modvat credit where the document substantially satisfies the prescribed requirements and duty payment can be verified. An invoice remained acceptable despite mentioning an additional name apart from the consignee, because the defect did not affect substantive entitlement to credit. Computer-generated numbering was also treated as valid, so the absence of a pre-printed serial number did not invalidate the document. A clerical omission in separately stating duty particulars was cured by the supplier's later letter, and the duty amount shown on the invoice supported credit. On these principles, the objections to denial of Modvat credit were rejected. en-us Wed, 06 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Oct 2010 12:29:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53408 Minor defects in an invoice do not by themselves disentitle Modvat credit where the document substantially satisfies the prescribed requirements and duty payment can be verified. An invoice remained acceptable despite mentioning an additional name apart from the consignee, because the defect did not affect substantive entitlement to credit. Computer-generated numbering was also treated as valid, so the absence of a pre-printed serial number did not invalidate the document. A clerical omission in separately stating duty particulars was cured by the supplier's later letter, and the duty amount shown on the invoice supported credit. On these principles, the objections to denial of Modvat credit were rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53408