https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83541 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the declaration under Rule 57G(1) was filed and received in the Range Office rather than the Divisional Office. The filing requirement was mandatory, but receipt by the Range Office, which formed part of the Assistant Collector's establishment, amounted to substantial compliance. The dispute did not concern the eligibility of the inputs or the availability of Modvat benefit on merits; the defect was only technical. Where the department had been informed and could verify the claim, denial of credit on that ground was unsustainable. en-us Wed, 10 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Jul 2011 11:02:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83541 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the declaration under Rule 57G(1) was filed and received in the Range Office rather than the Divisional Office. The filing requirement was mandatory, but receipt by the Range Office, which formed part of the Assistant Collector's establishment, amounted to substantial compliance. The dispute did not concern the eligibility of the inputs or the availability of Modvat benefit on merits; the defect was only technical. Where the department had been informed and could verify the claim, denial of credit on that ground was unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 10 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83541