https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94969 Modvat credit was upheld where imported goods were admittedly duty paid and customs officers confirmed import and clearance, even though the assessee produced an import application instead of the triplicate Bill of Entry. The prescribed document requirement under Rule 57G was treated as a procedural matter, not a substantive bar, because the Bill of Entry stationery was unavailable at the customs house and the Land Customs Station Inspector certified the import and asked that the application be treated as the Bill of Entry. On those facts, the documentary defect did not justify denial of credit. en-us Fri, 13 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Dec 2011 11:56:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94969 Modvat credit was upheld where imported goods were admittedly duty paid and customs officers confirmed import and clearance, even though the assessee produced an import application instead of the triplicate Bill of Entry. The prescribed document requirement under Rule 57G was treated as a procedural matter, not a substantive bar, because the Bill of Entry stationery was unavailable at the customs house and the Land Customs Station Inspector certified the import and asked that the application be treated as the Bill of Entry. On those facts, the documentary defect did not justify denial of credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 13 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94969