https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211762 Mere non-compliance with Rule 7(1)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and defects in delivery notes were treated as insufficient to deny Modvat credit where the record showed duty payment on inputs and their use in manufacturing excisable goods. The analysis relied on Board Circular No. 441/7/99-CX dated 23-02-1999, which states that departure from procedure alone cannot justify rejection of credit when substantive entitlement is otherwise established. The credit issue was also viewed against an exemption-based position on duty liability, and the denial was found to rest only on procedural defects, not on any lack of substantive eligibility. en-us Tue, 01 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Jun 2013 15:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211762 Mere non-compliance with Rule 7(1)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and defects in delivery notes were treated as insufficient to deny Modvat credit where the record showed duty payment on inputs and their use in manufacturing excisable goods. The analysis relied on Board Circular No. 441/7/99-CX dated 23-02-1999, which states that departure from procedure alone cannot justify rejection of credit when substantive entitlement is otherwise established. The credit issue was also viewed against an exemption-based position on duty liability, and the denial was found to rest only on procedural defects, not on any lack of substantive eligibility. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 01 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211762