https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102933 Procedural lapses in Modvat documentation did not defeat credit where duty payment and receipt of inputs were otherwise established. Endorsed gate passes were accepted as recognised documents under Rule 57G(2), and earlier issuance of subsidiary gate passes was treated as a curable procedural matter, so Modvat credit remained admissible. Likewise, non-filing of intimation of receipt of capital goods under Rule 57T(2) was treated as a procedural omission where declaration under Rule 57T(1) was undisputed, and capital goods credit could not be denied when substantive conditions were satisfied. The article states that technical defects cannot override substantive entitlement to credit. en-us Thu, 12 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:35:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102933 Procedural lapses in Modvat documentation did not defeat credit where duty payment and receipt of inputs were otherwise established. Endorsed gate passes were accepted as recognised documents under Rule 57G(2), and earlier issuance of subsidiary gate passes was treated as a curable procedural matter, so Modvat credit remained admissible. Likewise, non-filing of intimation of receipt of capital goods under Rule 57T(2) was treated as a procedural omission where declaration under Rule 57T(1) was undisputed, and capital goods credit could not be denied when substantive conditions were satisfied. The article states that technical defects cannot override substantive entitlement to credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 12 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102933