https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99872 Modvat credit on capital goods could not be denied for a one-day delay in filing the declaration where the credit was otherwise admissible, as the delay was held to be insignificant. Credit also could not be refused merely because cam profile was not separately named, since it formed part of the declared Dobby and the duty documents reflected that connection. On both issues, the technical objections were rejected, the denial of credit and penalty were set aside, and consequential relief followed. en-us Tue, 17 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:28:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99872 Modvat credit on capital goods could not be denied for a one-day delay in filing the declaration where the credit was otherwise admissible, as the delay was held to be insignificant. Credit also could not be refused merely because cam profile was not separately named, since it formed part of the declared Dobby and the duty documents reflected that connection. On both issues, the technical objections were rejected, the denial of credit and penalty were set aside, and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99872