https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95711 Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because the Rule 57G declaration does not state the final product by brand name or trade name. Where the final product is described in terms identical to an approved classification list, that description is sufficient for credit purposes. The approved classification was accepted by the department, so the same wording could not be treated as inadequate in the declaration. On that basis, the denial of credit was unjustified and the order allowing Modvat credit was left undisturbed. en-us Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Dec 2011 14:48:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95711 Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because the Rule 57G declaration does not state the final product by brand name or trade name. Where the final product is described in terms identical to an approved classification list, that description is sufficient for credit purposes. The approved classification was accepted by the department, so the same wording could not be treated as inadequate in the declaration. On that basis, the denial of credit was unjustified and the order allowing Modvat credit was left undisturbed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95711