https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100628 Rule 173H benefit cannot be denied for mere technical non-compliance where returned goods were actually received, verified by central excise officers, reprocessed and re-cleared. The absence of a D-3 intimation in the prescribed format and non-receipt of the duplicate invoice copy were treated as procedural lapses only, because the substantive facts of return and reprocessing were undisputed and no Modvat credit issue arose. On that basis, the demand and penalty were set aside and the assessee retained the reprocessing benefit; the limitation plea was not adjudicated. en-us Mon, 27 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:01:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100628 Rule 173H benefit cannot be denied for mere technical non-compliance where returned goods were actually received, verified by central excise officers, reprocessed and re-cleared. The absence of a D-3 intimation in the prescribed format and non-receipt of the duplicate invoice copy were treated as procedural lapses only, because the substantive facts of return and reprocessing were undisputed and no Modvat credit issue arose. On that basis, the demand and penalty were set aside and the assessee retained the reprocessing benefit; the limitation plea was not adjudicated. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 27 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100628