Modvat credit could not be denied where pipes and steel tubes were treated as interchangeable in the input declaration.

Modvat credit could not be denied merely because inputs were declared as pipes when they were described as steel tubes. Rule 57G requires a declaration sufficient to identify the inputs and final products for eligibility purposes, but it does not require a tariff classification exercise. Pipes and tubes were treated in common parlance as interchangeable, so describing the inputs as pipes was adequate. The omission to use the word tubes was only a procedural defect and did not justify denial of credit where the goods were not of a wholly different description.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied on the ground that the inputs declared as pipes were in fact steel tubes.

Analysis: Rule 57G requires a declaration of the inputs intended to be used and the final products manufactured, so that the Department can identify the goods for Modvat eligibility. The expression used in the declaration need not amount to a tariff classification exercise. On the evidence before it, pipes and tubes were treated in dictionary meaning and common parlance as interchangeable expressions, and the declaration describing the inputs as pipes was therefore sufficient. The omission to use the word tubes specifically was a procedural matter and could not justify denial of credit where the inputs were not of a totally different description.

Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the assessee, and the denial of Modvat credit was not sustainable.

---