https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93856 Trade Notice instructions under Rule 233 could not override entitlement to Modvat credit under Rule 57A. Although the inputs were defective or rejected steel ingots and the only lapse was non-filing of the D-3 declaration required by the Trade Notice, that omission was treated as procedural rather than a substantive bar to credit. In the absence of any allegation of fraud, evasion, or prejudice to administrative convenience, denial of credit on the ground of non-compliance with the Trade Notice was unjustified. en-us Fri, 24 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Nov 2011 13:39:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93856 Trade Notice instructions under Rule 233 could not override entitlement to Modvat credit under Rule 57A. Although the inputs were defective or rejected steel ingots and the only lapse was non-filing of the D-3 declaration required by the Trade Notice, that omission was treated as procedural rather than a substantive bar to credit. In the absence of any allegation of fraud, evasion, or prejudice to administrative convenience, denial of credit on the ground of non-compliance with the Trade Notice was unjustified. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 24 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93856