https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43700 A consignor lacked locus standi to challenge a trade notice or seek a certified copy of G.P. 1 gate pass for the consignee's Modvat credit claim, because the consignor had already discharged its obligation by transporting the goods and was not directly affected by the refusal. Rule 57G(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 required production of the original duty-paying document for credit, so a copy of G.P. 1 would not advance the consignee's claim. As the petitioner was not a person aggrieved and did not challenge the validity of the rule itself, the writ petition was not maintainable. en-us Thu, 28 Oct 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Jun 2010 14:22:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43700 A consignor lacked locus standi to challenge a trade notice or seek a certified copy of G.P. 1 gate pass for the consignee's Modvat credit claim, because the consignor had already discharged its obligation by transporting the goods and was not directly affected by the refusal. Rule 57G(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 required production of the original duty-paying document for credit, so a copy of G.P. 1 would not advance the consignee's claim. As the petitioner was not a person aggrieved and did not challenge the validity of the rule itself, the writ petition was not maintainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 28 Oct 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43700