Proforma credit cannot be denied for a mere RG 23 Part I omission where receipt and use of goods are undisputed.

Proforma credit could not be denied merely because the entry was omitted in RG 23 Part I when the D-3 declaration had been filed and receipt and utilisation of the goods were not disputed. The omission was treated as a procedural lapse, not a substantive violation, and was capable of rectification. In the absence of any challenge to the actual movement, receipt, or use of the goods, the procedural default did not justify reversal of the credit, leaving the assessee entitled to avail proforma credit.

---

---

Issues: Whether proforma credit could be denied merely because the entry was not made in RG 23 Part I when D-3 declaration had been filed and receipt and utilisation of the goods were not in dispute.

Analysis: The goods had been received and utilised, and the only default was the omission to make the entry in RG 23 Part I. That omission was treated as a procedural lapse, not a grave or substantive violation warranting denial of credit. In the absence of any challenge to the receipt and utilisation of the goods, the lapse was capable of rectification and did not justify reversal of the credit.

Conclusion: Proforma credit could not be denied on the basis of the procedural omission, and the assessee was held entitled to avail the credit.

---