https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87593 Modvat credit on inputs lying in balance could not be denied merely because reclassification and exemption of an intermediate product intervened, where the same inputs were actually used in a continuous manufacturing process for the declared final products. The Tribunal treated the objection as a procedural issue arising from the change in classification, and found no contravention of the Modvat rules since the inputs and their end use remained unchanged after the revised declaration. The substantive credit was therefore upheld, and the denial of Modvat benefit was held unsustainable. en-us Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:48:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87593 Modvat credit on inputs lying in balance could not be denied merely because reclassification and exemption of an intermediate product intervened, where the same inputs were actually used in a continuous manufacturing process for the declared final products. The Tribunal treated the objection as a procedural issue arising from the change in classification, and found no contravention of the Modvat rules since the inputs and their end use remained unchanged after the revised declaration. The substantive credit was therefore upheld, and the denial of Modvat benefit was held unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 27 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87593