https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78967 Credit was discussed on four points: photocopies of invoices and the absence of a separate covering letter did not, by themselves, justify denial where the documents were otherwise traceable, so the credit dispute on this ground was remanded for fresh consideration. Differential duty credit supported by a jurisdictional Superintendent's certificate was treated as admissible where the supplier had in fact paid the duty, so denial on that basis was set aside. Where inputs were removed as such under Rule 57AB(b), reversal of the credit already taken was considered sufficient and no further duty could be fastened, so that demand was unsustainable. Penalty was correspondingly reduced, with the remaining disputed issue left for reconsideration. en-us Tue, 20 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Dec 2010 12:53:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78967 Credit was discussed on four points: photocopies of invoices and the absence of a separate covering letter did not, by themselves, justify denial where the documents were otherwise traceable, so the credit dispute on this ground was remanded for fresh consideration. Differential duty credit supported by a jurisdictional Superintendent's certificate was treated as admissible where the supplier had in fact paid the duty, so denial on that basis was set aside. Where inputs were removed as such under Rule 57AB(b), reversal of the credit already taken was considered sufficient and no further duty could be fastened, so that demand was unsustainable. Penalty was correspondingly reduced, with the remaining disputed issue left for reconsideration. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 20 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78967