Misdeclaration of input material defeated Modvat credit and sustained the demand where chemical testing showed battery waste.

Declared as lead waste and scrap under Tariff Heading 7802.00, the inputs were found on chemical examination to consist mainly of lead oxide and to be battery waste rather than metal waste and scrap. On that factual basis, the deemed Modvat credit was wrongly availed because the material did not answer the tariff description claimed. The misdescription was held deliberate, so the allegation of suppression succeeded and the demand was sustained; the limitation objection therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to Modvat credit on the inputs declared as lead waste and scrap, and whether the demand could be sustained in view of the allegation of misdeclaration and suppression.

Analysis: The declared inputs were shown as lead waste and scrap under Tariff Heading 7802.00, which falls in Section XV of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and covers base metals and articles of base metal. The relevant tariff note treats waste and scrap as metal waste and scrap from manufacture or mechanical working of metals or metal goods definitely not usable as such. On chemical examination, the material was found to consist predominantly of lead oxide with only a small percentage of lead, and it was treated as battery waste rather than metal waste and scrap. The finding was that the appellants knew the nature of the material received, mis-described it in the declaration, and thereby wrongly availed deemed Modvat credit. The plea on limitation also failed because the finding of deliberate misdeclaration and suppression supported the demand.

Conclusion: The Modvat credit was not admissible and the demand was sustainable; the allegation of suppression was upheld.

---