https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260151 Modvat credit could not be denied where the inputs were admittedly received in the assessee's factory and used in manufacture, because Rule 57G was substantially complied with despite the absence of the importer's declaration. The court also rejected the apprehension of double benefit, as there was no allegation or material that the importer had claimed, or even attempted to claim, refund of countervailing duty. The circular relied on did not change the result on these facts, so the assessee was entitled to Modvat credit. en-us Mon, 06 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Jan 2016 11:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260151 Modvat credit could not be denied where the inputs were admittedly received in the assessee's factory and used in manufacture, because Rule 57G was substantially complied with despite the absence of the importer's declaration. The court also rejected the apprehension of double benefit, as there was no allegation or material that the importer had claimed, or even attempted to claim, refund of countervailing duty. The circular relied on did not change the result on these facts, so the assessee was entitled to Modvat credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 06 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260151