https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50754 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the declaration for capital goods was filed after installation, where the verification requirement had already been withdrawn and the delay was only a matter of timing. Credit also could not be refused for want of formal or timely acknowledgement by the proper officer, because a belated departmental acknowledgement was treated as relating back to the filing date and delayed action could not defeat entitlement. The governing principle applied was that, once the relevant requirement is withdrawn or substantially complied with, procedural delay in filing or acknowledgement does not by itself disentitle the assessee from credit. en-us Fri, 04 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Sep 2010 13:09:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50754 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the declaration for capital goods was filed after installation, where the verification requirement had already been withdrawn and the delay was only a matter of timing. Credit also could not be refused for want of formal or timely acknowledgement by the proper officer, because a belated departmental acknowledgement was treated as relating back to the filing date and delayed action could not defeat entitlement. The governing principle applied was that, once the relevant requirement is withdrawn or substantially complied with, procedural delay in filing or acknowledgement does not by itself disentitle the assessee from credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 04 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50754