https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167234 Late D-3 intimation under Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules did not, by itself, justify denial of proforma credit where the lapse was satisfactorily explained and the facts showed substantial compliance with the procedure. The Tribunal noted that the credit was not a case of wrong credit arising from officer error, but also that unauthorised credit could not be retained merely because the intimation was delayed. In the circumstances, including the nature of the goods, prior processing, and the relaxation indicated by the relevant Trade Notice, the delay was condoned and consequential relief followed. en-us Mon, 21 Jan 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Dec 2014 12:41:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167234 Late D-3 intimation under Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules did not, by itself, justify denial of proforma credit where the lapse was satisfactorily explained and the facts showed substantial compliance with the procedure. The Tribunal noted that the credit was not a case of wrong credit arising from officer error, but also that unauthorised credit could not be retained merely because the intimation was delayed. In the circumstances, including the nature of the goods, prior processing, and the relaxation indicated by the relevant Trade Notice, the delay was condoned and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 21 Jan 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167234