https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109758 Modvat credit on imported inputs could not be denied merely for non-strict compliance with the declaration or intimation procedure, where the duty-paying document contained the essential particulars and the inputs were received for use in manufacturing final products. The absence of a date in the declaration was treated as a procedural defect only, not a substantive bar to credit. Rule 57G(11) was applied to reflect that credit should be allowed when substantive requirements are met and the Assistant Commissioner is satisfied about intended factory use of the inputs. The operative effect is that procedural imperfections alone do not justify denial of Modvat credit. en-us Mon, 11 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:11:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109758 Modvat credit on imported inputs could not be denied merely for non-strict compliance with the declaration or intimation procedure, where the duty-paying document contained the essential particulars and the inputs were received for use in manufacturing final products. The absence of a date in the declaration was treated as a procedural defect only, not a substantive bar to credit. Rule 57G(11) was applied to reflect that credit should be allowed when substantive requirements are met and the Assistant Commissioner is satisfied about intended factory use of the inputs. The operative effect is that procedural imperfections alone do not justify denial of Modvat credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 11 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109758