https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83231 A clear transitional claim for Modvat credit on inputs lying in stock on 1-3-1986 was not to be rejected merely because the declaration did not specifically mention Rule 57H, where the request otherwise showed the intended relief and could be verified from records. The lapse was treated as curable, subject to production of supporting documents and satisfaction of the Assistant Collector. By contrast, Rule 57H was held confined to inputs in stock or inputs received for use in manufacture, and it did not extend Modvat credit to finished goods already manufactured and lying in stock. The claim on finished goods was therefore correctly denied. en-us Mon, 18 Apr 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Jul 2011 18:54:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83231 A clear transitional claim for Modvat credit on inputs lying in stock on 1-3-1986 was not to be rejected merely because the declaration did not specifically mention Rule 57H, where the request otherwise showed the intended relief and could be verified from records. The lapse was treated as curable, subject to production of supporting documents and satisfaction of the Assistant Collector. By contrast, Rule 57H was held confined to inputs in stock or inputs received for use in manufacture, and it did not extend Modvat credit to finished goods already manufactured and lying in stock. The claim on finished goods was therefore correctly denied. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 18 Apr 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83231