https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84249 A Rule 57G Modvat declaration was construed by functional use rather than exact nomenclature, so a DC drive described as a speed regulator was treated as covered by the declaration and credit could not be denied on that ground. The omission to separately declare some final products was treated as a technical irregularity only, because the goods formed part of the same plant and the substantive credit position remained intact subject to verification of actual use. The commentary emphasises that Modvat credit should not be refused for minor description mismatches or non-declaration of final products where the underlying entitlement is otherwise established. en-us Mon, 20 Feb 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:40:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84249 A Rule 57G Modvat declaration was construed by functional use rather than exact nomenclature, so a DC drive described as a speed regulator was treated as covered by the declaration and credit could not be denied on that ground. The omission to separately declare some final products was treated as a technical irregularity only, because the goods formed part of the same plant and the substantive credit position remained intact subject to verification of actual use. The commentary emphasises that Modvat credit should not be refused for minor description mismatches or non-declaration of final products where the underlying entitlement is otherwise established. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 20 Feb 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84249