https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95653 Filing a Rule 57H declaration before the Superintendent rather than the Assistant Commissioner was treated as a procedural lapse, not a substantive default, because the declaration had reached the department and the purpose of stock verification and departmental scrutiny could still be achieved. Credit could not be denied on that technical ground, and the duty demand and penalty were unsustainable. en-us Mon, 12 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:55:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95653 Filing a Rule 57H declaration before the Superintendent rather than the Assistant Commissioner was treated as a procedural lapse, not a substantive default, because the declaration had reached the department and the purpose of stock verification and departmental scrutiny could still be achieved. Credit could not be denied on that technical ground, and the duty demand and penalty were unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 12 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95653