https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83507 A declaration under Rule 57G did not fail for MODVAT purposes merely because the sub-heading of inputs was omitted or wrongly stated, where the main heading and description sufficiently identified the inputs and the declaration substantially complied with the rule. Credit was upheld for those items where only the sub-heading was defective. Where the description itself differed from the declared input, proper disclosure was not made and credit was denied. The result was partial relief, limited to the items satisfying substantial compliance. en-us Thu, 31 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Jul 2011 18:21:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83507 A declaration under Rule 57G did not fail for MODVAT purposes merely because the sub-heading of inputs was omitted or wrongly stated, where the main heading and description sufficiently identified the inputs and the declaration substantially complied with the rule. Credit was upheld for those items where only the sub-heading was defective. Where the description itself differed from the declared input, proper disclosure was not made and credit was denied. The result was partial relief, limited to the items satisfying substantial compliance. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 31 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83507