https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107881 Rule 57E allowed credit of subsequently paid additional duty on inputs where the assessee could show that the differential duty had in fact been paid. Denial of Modvat credit could not rest on the absence of a certificate from the jurisdictional Superintendent of the input manufacturers, because the rule did not prescribe that certificate as a condition for credit. Official records evidencing payment of the additional duty were sufficient, and where those documents were not shown to be false or nonexistent, the credit claim was sustainable. An uncommunicated departmental instruction could not add a further procedural requirement and defeat the credit. en-us Mon, 21 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Mar 2012 14:50:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107881 Rule 57E allowed credit of subsequently paid additional duty on inputs where the assessee could show that the differential duty had in fact been paid. Denial of Modvat credit could not rest on the absence of a certificate from the jurisdictional Superintendent of the input manufacturers, because the rule did not prescribe that certificate as a condition for credit. Official records evidencing payment of the additional duty were sufficient, and where those documents were not shown to be false or nonexistent, the credit claim was sustainable. An uncommunicated departmental instruction could not add a further procedural requirement and defeat the credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 21 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107881