https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47471 Modvat credit under Rule 57A could not be denied merely because entries were made in RG-23 instead of RG-23A after the transition from Rule 56A, where the assessee was otherwise entitled to the credit and the relevant transactions were disclosed in the returns. The incorrect register entry was treated as a procedural lapse linked to the scheme transition, not as a substantive misuse of the credit facility. However, the procedural requirements of the credit scheme were not ignored entirely, and a monetary penalty was sustained. Credit restoration was allowed, subject to reduction of Rs. 15,000 as penalty. en-us Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Jul 2010 09:56:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47471 Modvat credit under Rule 57A could not be denied merely because entries were made in RG-23 instead of RG-23A after the transition from Rule 56A, where the assessee was otherwise entitled to the credit and the relevant transactions were disclosed in the returns. The incorrect register entry was treated as a procedural lapse linked to the scheme transition, not as a substantive misuse of the credit facility. However, the procedural requirements of the credit scheme were not ignored entirely, and a monetary penalty was sustained. Credit restoration was allowed, subject to reduction of Rs. 15,000 as penalty. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 22 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47471