Modvat credit on lead-tin alloy upheld where declared inputs covered the same tariff description and manufacturing use.

Modvat credit on lead-tin alloy was treated as allowable where the assessee had declared lead and tin as inputs and had also indicated use of lead alloy in manufacture of radiators. The discussion held that Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was substantially complied with because the disputed alloy had a clear nexus with the declared inputs and fell within the same tariff description. The analysis followed the earlier Tribunal approach that credit should not be denied merely because the exact alloy was not separately declared when its use and tariff classification were sufficiently covered by the declaration.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied on lead-tin alloy merely because it was not separately declared, when the assessee had declared lead and tin inputs and indicated that lead alloy would also be used.

Analysis: The declaration filed by the assessee showed the main inputs as lead and tin and also referred to the use of lead alloy. The disputed input was lead-tin alloy, which had a clear nexus with the declared inputs and was stated to be used in the manufacture of radiators. The requirement under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was treated as substantially complied with, and the classification discussion showed that the alloy fell within the declared tariff description. The reasoning adopted by the appellate authority was consistent with the earlier Tribunal view that Modvat credit cannot be denied where the undisclosed input has a nexus with the declared inputs and falls within the same tariff heading or sub-heading.

Conclusion: Modvat credit could not be denied on the disputed lead-tin alloy, and the assessee was entitled to the credit.

---