https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109042 MODVAT credit could not be denied merely because no fresh declaration was filed under Rule 57G for the later period, where an earlier declaration had already been received by the department, the assessee had indicated that duty would be paid after crossing the SSI exemption limit, and the duty-paid inputs were actually received and used in manufacture. The amended Rule 57G and the Board circular on minor procedural lapses supported the view that substantive entitlement should not be defeated by a procedural omission, and they were treated as applicable to pending matters. Credit was therefore held admissible. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Apr 2012 16:01:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109042 MODVAT credit could not be denied merely because no fresh declaration was filed under Rule 57G for the later period, where an earlier declaration had already been received by the department, the assessee had indicated that duty would be paid after crossing the SSI exemption limit, and the duty-paid inputs were actually received and used in manufacture. The amended Rule 57G and the Board circular on minor procedural lapses supported the view that substantive entitlement should not be defeated by a procedural omission, and they were treated as applicable to pending matters. Credit was therefore held admissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 24 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109042