https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94347 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the Rule 57G declaration was filed in the name of the loan licensor-manufacturer rather than only in the name of the loan licence unit. The declaration disclosed the respondents' loan licence status and excise registration, an earlier letter had informed the Department that manufacture was undertaken on behalf of the licensor, and a revised declaration was later filed. As the declared inputs were used in the declared final products and the Department had accepted the position, the defect was treated as procedural, not substantive, and credit was held admissible on the facts. en-us Fri, 02 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:36:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94347 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the Rule 57G declaration was filed in the name of the loan licensor-manufacturer rather than only in the name of the loan licence unit. The declaration disclosed the respondents' loan licence status and excise registration, an earlier letter had informed the Department that manufacture was undertaken on behalf of the licensor, and a revised declaration was later filed. As the declared inputs were used in the declared final products and the Department had accepted the position, the defect was treated as procedural, not substantive, and credit was held admissible on the facts. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 02 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94347