https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248888 Procedural requirements under Rule 57E could not defeat a substantive entitlement to credit where duty payment was established. The earlier order had not finally decided credit admissibility on merits, so the recipient's right to avail credit remained alive under the saving protection in Section 38A. Once no suppression or misstatement was found, the bar in Rule 57E(3) did not justify refusal of certification, and supplementary invoices with the certificate were treated as valid for credit availment. On that basis, the related penalties could not survive. en-us Mon, 16 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Jun 2014 17:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248888 Procedural requirements under Rule 57E could not defeat a substantive entitlement to credit where duty payment was established. The earlier order had not finally decided credit admissibility on merits, so the recipient's right to avail credit remained alive under the saving protection in Section 38A. Once no suppression or misstatement was found, the bar in Rule 57E(3) did not justify refusal of certification, and supplementary invoices with the certificate were treated as valid for credit availment. On that basis, the related penalties could not survive. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 16 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248888