https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106157 Modvat credit could not be denied where processed goods were moved under the Rule 57F(3) procedure and the defect was only in documentation, with no substantive duty prejudice shown. The lapse was treated as a procedural contravention, and the credit denial and recovery were set aside. Penalty under Rule 173Q also failed because the statutory ingredients, including ineligible credit, improper accounting, or intent to evade duty, were not proved. With confiscation not sustained and no evasion established, the penalty was set aside. The appeal succeeded on both the credit and penalty issues. en-us Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Mar 2012 18:12:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106157 Modvat credit could not be denied where processed goods were moved under the Rule 57F(3) procedure and the defect was only in documentation, with no substantive duty prejudice shown. The lapse was treated as a procedural contravention, and the credit denial and recovery were set aside. Penalty under Rule 173Q also failed because the statutory ingredients, including ineligible credit, improper accounting, or intent to evade duty, were not proved. With confiscation not sustained and no evasion established, the penalty was set aside. The appeal succeeded on both the credit and penalty issues. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106157