https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118737 Notification No. 58/97 required an invoice declaration that duty liability had already been discharged by the manufacturer or supplier before deemed Modvat credit could be claimed. A declaration stating that duty was merely "to be discharged" did not satisfy that condition, because it was materially different from a statement of actual payment. The earlier High Court ruling was distinguishable as it concerned a case where duty had in fact been discharged and only further proof was in issue. On the facts stated, the statutory prerequisite for deemed credit was not met, so the credit claim failed. en-us Wed, 06 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jul 2012 14:23:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118737 Notification No. 58/97 required an invoice declaration that duty liability had already been discharged by the manufacturer or supplier before deemed Modvat credit could be claimed. A declaration stating that duty was merely "to be discharged" did not satisfy that condition, because it was materially different from a statement of actual payment. The earlier High Court ruling was distinguishable as it concerned a case where duty had in fact been discharged and only further proof was in issue. On the facts stated, the statutory prerequisite for deemed credit was not met, so the credit claim failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118737