https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89688 Proper authorisation to file the appeal was upheld because the record showed the Collector had applied his mind and the note sheet supported valid sanction, so the preliminary objection failed. Proforma credit under Rule 56A was denied because the imported inputs had suffered countervailing duty under Tariff Item 68, while the finished tape recorders fell under Tariff Item 37AA; the proviso required correspondence between the duty-paid inputs and the finished excisable goods under the same tariff heading, which was not satisfied. The earlier finding on eligibility was set aside and the respondent was held ineligible for credit. en-us Tue, 05 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:44:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89688 Proper authorisation to file the appeal was upheld because the record showed the Collector had applied his mind and the note sheet supported valid sanction, so the preliminary objection failed. Proforma credit under Rule 56A was denied because the imported inputs had suffered countervailing duty under Tariff Item 68, while the finished tape recorders fell under Tariff Item 37AA; the proviso required correspondence between the duty-paid inputs and the finished excisable goods under the same tariff heading, which was not satisfied. The earlier finding on eligibility was set aside and the respondent was held ineligible for credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 05 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89688