https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83927 Modvat credit on aluminium wire bars and wire rods manufactured through job workers was treated as admissible despite the absence of prior permission under Rule 57F(2), because non-compliance with procedural requirements did not defeat substantive entitlement where duty had been paid and the goods were received back for the declared use. That entitlement was made subject to verification that no double credit had already been taken and that receipt and utilisation of the wire rods were established. Credit on processing loss at the job worker's premises was not admissible, because such loss could be condoned only within Rule 57F(3) and the required intimation and permission safeguards were not followed. en-us Mon, 11 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:25:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83927 Modvat credit on aluminium wire bars and wire rods manufactured through job workers was treated as admissible despite the absence of prior permission under Rule 57F(2), because non-compliance with procedural requirements did not defeat substantive entitlement where duty had been paid and the goods were received back for the declared use. That entitlement was made subject to verification that no double credit had already been taken and that receipt and utilisation of the wire rods were established. Credit on processing loss at the job worker's premises was not admissible, because such loss could be condoned only within Rule 57F(3) and the required intimation and permission safeguards were not followed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 11 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83927