https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116960 The Tribunal treated the non-entry of Modvat credit in dealers' books as a prima facie technical violation, not a substantive breach, because there was no allegation of excess credit or other violation of Modvat rules. It also noted that the registration scheme under Rule 174 allowed single registration for a trader and manufacturer, and found no prima facie bar under Rule 51A on dealing in goods not manufactured by the assessee. On that basis, full pre-deposit under Section 35F was not insisted upon and only partial pre-deposit was directed, with the appellate authority to hear the matter on compliance. en-us Mon, 20 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Jun 2012 12:23:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116960 The Tribunal treated the non-entry of Modvat credit in dealers' books as a prima facie technical violation, not a substantive breach, because there was no allegation of excess credit or other violation of Modvat rules. It also noted that the registration scheme under Rule 174 allowed single registration for a trader and manufacturer, and found no prima facie bar under Rule 51A on dealing in goods not manufactured by the assessee. On that basis, full pre-deposit under Section 35F was not insisted upon and only partial pre-deposit was directed, with the appellate authority to hear the matter on compliance. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 20 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116960