https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103810 Refractory materials used for lining and the proper functioning of machinery were treated as parts of the machinery rather than inputs used in relation to manufacture, so Modvat credit under Rule 57A was not available. The materials were, however, covered by the capital goods scheme under Rule 57Q, and credit was directed to be allowed on that basis. Denial of credit was held unwarranted merely because the declaration had been filed under the wrong rule, as strict insistence on the declaration requirement alone could not defeat otherwise admissible capital goods credit. en-us Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:58:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103810 Refractory materials used for lining and the proper functioning of machinery were treated as parts of the machinery rather than inputs used in relation to manufacture, so Modvat credit under Rule 57A was not available. The materials were, however, covered by the capital goods scheme under Rule 57Q, and credit was directed to be allowed on that basis. Denial of credit was held unwarranted merely because the declaration had been filed under the wrong rule, as strict insistence on the declaration requirement alone could not defeat otherwise admissible capital goods credit. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103810