1996 (2) TMI 254

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Respondents. [Order]. -  In this Appeal, Modvat credit was denied to the appellants on the ground that no declaration under Rule 57G was filed in respect of phosphoric acid as raw material for nylon filament yarn. 2.  The facts of the case in brief, are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of nylon and polyester filament yarn. For manufacture of these yarns, t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rror crept in and phosphoric acid was indicated as an input for polyester filament yarn. He submitted that the Asstt. Collector, in his order-in-original also observed that phosphoric acid is used for recovery of lactum which is not used in the manufacture of polyester filament yarn. The learned Counsel therefore, submitted that phosphoric acid no doubt was indicated as an input, but simply becaus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... this Tribunal in the case of British Physical Laboratories v. CCE, Bangalore reported in 1994 (74) E.L.T 593. He submitted that there was substantial compliance and therefore, on technical paper substantial benefit of Modvat credit should not be denied to the appellants. He prayed for setting aside the order of the lower authorities. 3.  Shri Mewa Singh, the learned SDR reiterated the fin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on filed on 28-9-1992 as an input for polyester filament yarn is a clerical mistake. I also observe that this Tribunal in the case of British Physical Laboratories cited supra held that non-mention of the goods specifically in a particular column of the declaration is a mere procedural irregularity. Similarly this Tribunal in the case of Geeta Steel Rolling Mills cited supra had held : "However....