2000 (8) TMI 395

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he assessee filed on 20-2-1987 a declaration under rule 57G showing as final product asbestos mill board. On that date asbestos mill board was not an item included as final product in the table to Notification 177/86. It specified the input and final products for purpose of rule relating to Modvat credit. It came to be so notified on 1-3-1987. The assessee received the inputs required for utilising them in the manufacture but did not take credit, utilised the credit taken towards the payment of duty on the final product. On an objection being raised by the department (on the issue which was the subject matter of the appeal E/671/91 which has been withdrawn) the assessee filed a declaration under Rule 57G. It is stated that the declaration w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....it would have been allowed in terms of Rule 57H. 5. The departmental representative contends that the Tribunal's decision in Standard Alkali Chemical Division is not correct and has not taken note of the earlier decision in Anglo-French Drug Co. v. CCE. He relies upon the reasoning in that earlier order. The reasoning in that order is that it was only by notification issued under Rule 57H that the input and the final product are specified. The inputs and the final products which are not so notified under such notification are not input and the final product for purpose of Rule 57A or other rules relating to Modvat. No declaration for such goods which are not input and final product could be filed. This reasoning appears to be sound.....