https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52382 Modvat credit could not be denied and penalties could not be sustained where duty-paid goods were admittedly sent for repair under Rule 57F challans, credit was reversed, and statutory records showed no irregularity. The omission to note identification marks or serial numbers in the challans did not, by itself, prove that the goods were not sent for repair or that new goods had been substituted. In the absence of corroborative evidence of substitution, clandestine clearance, or a breach of the prescribed repair procedure, the adverse inference was unsustainable. The denial of credit and imposition of penalties were therefore set aside, with consequential relief granted. en-us Tue, 28 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Oct 2010 15:15:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52382 Modvat credit could not be denied and penalties could not be sustained where duty-paid goods were admittedly sent for repair under Rule 57F challans, credit was reversed, and statutory records showed no irregularity. The omission to note identification marks or serial numbers in the challans did not, by itself, prove that the goods were not sent for repair or that new goods had been substituted. In the absence of corroborative evidence of substitution, clandestine clearance, or a breach of the prescribed repair procedure, the adverse inference was unsustainable. The denial of credit and imposition of penalties were therefore set aside, with consequential relief granted. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 28 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52382