https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81015 Credit of duty on inputs under Rule 57A could not be denied merely because the gate pass was not endorsed in the assessee's name where the consignment was in fact diverted to the assessee and supported by the consignor's letter. The admitted duty payment, the diversion explanation, and the document from the consignor established actual receipt of the inputs for manufacture. The defect was procedural, not substantive, so denial of credit and reversal of the demand were not sustainable. en-us Thu, 20 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:10:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81015 Credit of duty on inputs under Rule 57A could not be denied merely because the gate pass was not endorsed in the assessee's name where the consignment was in fact diverted to the assessee and supported by the consignor's letter. The admitted duty payment, the diversion explanation, and the document from the consignor established actual receipt of the inputs for manufacture. The defect was procedural, not substantive, so denial of credit and reversal of the demand were not sustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 20 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81015