https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256186 Rule 57F(4) of the Central Excise Rules was treated as directory because the MODVAT scheme, read as a whole, allowed inputs to be sent for job work and contemplated recalculation or adjustment of credit if they were not returned within 180 days. The time limit was therefore a procedural condition, not an absolute bar to credit, where substantive entitlement to MODVAT credit was otherwise established. Delay in receipt of the inputs did not justify denial of credit in full, and the Revenue's challenge to allowance of credit failed. en-us Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Jun 2015 15:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256186 Rule 57F(4) of the Central Excise Rules was treated as directory because the MODVAT scheme, read as a whole, allowed inputs to be sent for job work and contemplated recalculation or adjustment of credit if they were not returned within 180 days. The time limit was therefore a procedural condition, not an absolute bar to credit, where substantive entitlement to MODVAT credit was otherwise established. Delay in receipt of the inputs did not justify denial of credit in full, and the Revenue's challenge to allowance of credit failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256186