https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113817 Modvat credit on capital goods installed in a factory through a contractor or job worker could not be denied merely because prior permission of the Assistant Commissioner was not obtained under Rule 57T(3) / Rule 57T(7). The document states that duty-paid documents were in order, duty payment on the capital goods was not disputed, and the goods were actually received and installed in the factory. The rule was treated as enabling the Assistant Commissioner to allow credit on sufficient cause, not as making prior permission a condition precedent to availment of credit. Denial of credit on that sole ground was therefore unsustainable. en-us Tue, 09 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 May 2012 15:41:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113817 Modvat credit on capital goods installed in a factory through a contractor or job worker could not be denied merely because prior permission of the Assistant Commissioner was not obtained under Rule 57T(3) / Rule 57T(7). The document states that duty-paid documents were in order, duty payment on the capital goods was not disputed, and the goods were actually received and installed in the factory. The rule was treated as enabling the Assistant Commissioner to allow credit on sufficient cause, not as making prior permission a condition precedent to availment of credit. Denial of credit on that sole ground was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 09 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113817