https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91556 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the Revenue alleged that particular inputs were not used in the exact final products declared, where RG 23A Part II was lawfully maintained as a common credit account for multiple inputs. Because the Rules did not require input-wise segregation of utilisation in the manner alleged, the common account and monthly returns did not show wrongful or illegal use of credit. On that basis, denial of credit, duty demands, and penalties were unsustainable, and the assessee was entitled to consequential relief. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Oct 2011 12:02:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91556 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the Revenue alleged that particular inputs were not used in the exact final products declared, where RG 23A Part II was lawfully maintained as a common credit account for multiple inputs. Because the Rules did not require input-wise segregation of utilisation in the manner alleged, the common account and monthly returns did not show wrongful or illegal use of credit. On that basis, denial of credit, duty demands, and penalties were unsustainable, and the assessee was entitled to consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 25 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91556