https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84247 A taxpayer eligible for higher notional Modvat credit under Rule 57B read with Notification No. 175/86 could later claim that credit even after initially taking a lower amount under Rule 57A. The substantive entitlement to the higher credit was not disputed, and a mistaken omission in recording the correct duty amount in the credit account did not extinguish the benefit conferred by the governing provisions. The disallowance of the additional credit was therefore not sustainable, because an accounting error could not override the underlying statutory eligibility for Modvat credit. en-us Fri, 10 Feb 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:37:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84247 A taxpayer eligible for higher notional Modvat credit under Rule 57B read with Notification No. 175/86 could later claim that credit even after initially taking a lower amount under Rule 57A. The substantive entitlement to the higher credit was not disputed, and a mistaken omission in recording the correct duty amount in the credit account did not extinguish the benefit conferred by the governing provisions. The disallowance of the additional credit was therefore not sustainable, because an accounting error could not override the underlying statutory eligibility for Modvat credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 10 Feb 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84247