https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118627 Modvat credit could not be denied where inputs were issued to the shop floor, entered the manufacturing process, and were later rejected during that process, because Rule 57D protected credit from denial merely on rejection or waste arising in manufacture. The demand on alleged shortage of inputs was held time-barred because the shortage was detected in January 1999 but the show cause notice was issued only in March 2003. The dispute relating to goods sent out for repairs under Rule 57F(4) was treated as covered by prior Tribunal authority, and the penalties under Rule 209A were unsustainable because that provision was inapplicable to the limited companies concerned. en-us Mon, 28 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Feb 2024 12:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118627 Modvat credit could not be denied where inputs were issued to the shop floor, entered the manufacturing process, and were later rejected during that process, because Rule 57D protected credit from denial merely on rejection or waste arising in manufacture. The demand on alleged shortage of inputs was held time-barred because the shortage was detected in January 1999 but the show cause notice was issued only in March 2003. The dispute relating to goods sent out for repairs under Rule 57F(4) was treated as covered by prior Tribunal authority, and the penalties under Rule 209A were unsustainable because that provision was inapplicable to the limited companies concerned. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 28 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118627