https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84508 Modvat credit could not be denied solely because prior permission under Rule 57F(2) was not obtained before sending declared inputs to a job worker. The inputs and finished products had already been declared, and permission was granted shortly thereafter for the same goods. The rule was treated as requiring permission, but not as imposing prior permission as an absolute substantive condition. The omission was therefore a procedural defect, and the later permission was capable of ratifying the earlier intermediate removal. On that basis, denial of credit was unsustainable and relief was granted to the assessee. en-us Wed, 19 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Jul 2011 13:24:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84508 Modvat credit could not be denied solely because prior permission under Rule 57F(2) was not obtained before sending declared inputs to a job worker. The inputs and finished products had already been declared, and permission was granted shortly thereafter for the same goods. The rule was treated as requiring permission, but not as imposing prior permission as an absolute substantive condition. The omission was therefore a procedural defect, and the later permission was capable of ratifying the earlier intermediate removal. On that basis, denial of credit was unsustainable and relief was granted to the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 19 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84508