https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115916 Deemed Modvat credit was considered dependent on strict compliance with the notification conditions and proof that the inputs had actually suffered duty. The invoices for the relevant period referred only to discharge of duty liability under Rule 96ZP(3) and did not contain a clear declaration that duty had been paid, nor was there evidence of actual duty discharge by the supplier. The precedent relied on was treated as distinguishable because that case had both a declaration and supporting proof of payment. On this basis, the existing record was found insufficient to sustain the credit, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision after further verification or an opportunity to the respondents. en-us Mon, 07 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Jun 2012 12:22:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115916 Deemed Modvat credit was considered dependent on strict compliance with the notification conditions and proof that the inputs had actually suffered duty. The invoices for the relevant period referred only to discharge of duty liability under Rule 96ZP(3) and did not contain a clear declaration that duty had been paid, nor was there evidence of actual duty discharge by the supplier. The precedent relied on was treated as distinguishable because that case had both a declaration and supporting proof of payment. On this basis, the existing record was found insufficient to sustain the credit, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision after further verification or an opportunity to the respondents. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 07 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115916