https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85444 Modvat credit was considered unavailable on defective gears returned by customers where the assessee could not prove that the goods were subjected to a fresh manufacturing process. Mere filing of a declaration under Rule 57G did not establish manufacture, and the record contained no evidence that a new product emerged from the returned goods. Reconditioning alone was treated as insufficient to amount to manufacture. The availability of alternative clearance routes under Rules 173H and 173L did not cure the absence of proof supporting the credit claim, so the denial of Modvat credit was upheld. en-us Tue, 14 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Aug 2011 11:06:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85444 Modvat credit was considered unavailable on defective gears returned by customers where the assessee could not prove that the goods were subjected to a fresh manufacturing process. Mere filing of a declaration under Rule 57G did not establish manufacture, and the record contained no evidence that a new product emerged from the returned goods. Reconditioning alone was treated as insufficient to amount to manufacture. The availability of alternative clearance routes under Rules 173H and 173L did not cure the absence of proof supporting the credit claim, so the denial of Modvat credit was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 14 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85444