https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109496 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the issuing manufacturer was alleged to have evaded duty; in the absence of independent evidence that duty was not paid on the specific invoices relied upon, the credit claim was upheld. The extended limitation period under the Central Excise Rules also failed because the order did not identify any omitted reasonable steps by the assessee, and a bare allegation of inadequate verification was insufficient without fraud, wilful misstatement, collusion, or suppression of facts. On those findings, the demand and penalty were unsustainable. en-us Mon, 12 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 14:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109496 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the issuing manufacturer was alleged to have evaded duty; in the absence of independent evidence that duty was not paid on the specific invoices relied upon, the credit claim was upheld. The extended limitation period under the Central Excise Rules also failed because the order did not identify any omitted reasonable steps by the assessee, and a bare allegation of inadequate verification was insufficient without fraud, wilful misstatement, collusion, or suppression of facts. On those findings, the demand and penalty were unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 12 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109496