https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97651 The appellants, manufacturers of excisable goods, were denied Modvat credit for undeclared items like cushion gum and tread strips due to procedural errors in filing a complete declaration as required by Rule 57G. Despite the appellants' arguments, both authorities and the Tribunal rejected the credit. The High Court directed the Tribunal to address questions on the denial of Modvat benefits for procedural lapses. The Tribunal, in response to the High Court's directive, prepared a statement for reference, emphasizing the need to clarify the legal rights of the assessee in accessing Modvat benefits despite procedural errors. The Tribunal forwarded the case to the High Court for further consideration. en-us Mon, 16 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:52:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97651 The appellants, manufacturers of excisable goods, were denied Modvat credit for undeclared items like cushion gum and tread strips due to procedural errors in filing a complete declaration as required by Rule 57G. Despite the appellants' arguments, both authorities and the Tribunal rejected the credit. The High Court directed the Tribunal to address questions on the denial of Modvat benefits for procedural lapses. The Tribunal, in response to the High Court's directive, prepared a statement for reference, emphasizing the need to clarify the legal rights of the assessee in accessing Modvat benefits despite procedural errors. The Tribunal forwarded the case to the High Court for further consideration. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 16 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97651