Rule 57G declaration errors do not automatically bar Modvat credit where classification mistake and supporting evidence require reconsideration.

Modvat credit under Rule 57G was considered where the assessee said the reference to Heading 72.13 in the declaration was an inadvertent mistake and the goods were actually classifiable under Heading 72.14. The record did not conclusively establish that the assessee had never manufactured goods under Heading 72.13 or lacked machinery to do so, and those facts required evidence. Credit could not be finally denied on the existing record, so the matter was remitted for reconsideration after allowing the assessee to adduce evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether credit of duty on inputs could be denied merely because Heading 72.13 was not mentioned in the Rule 57G declaration when the assessee claimed that the goods were in fact classifiable under Heading 72.14 and that the omission was a mistake.

Analysis: The declaration under Rule 57G was examined in light of the assessee's explanation that the reference to Heading 72.13 was inadvertent. The record did not show a clear and categorical stand that the assessee had never manufactured goods classifiable under Heading 72.13 or that it lacked the machinery to do so. Since the assessee sought to establish these facts before the Assistant Commissioner and the Department had no objection, the matter required a fresh opportunity for evidence and decision according to law.

Conclusion: Credit could not be finally denied on the existing record. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remitted for reconsideration after granting an opportunity to adduce evidence.

---