2000 (12) TMI 564 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Whether the declaration under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules has been filed by M/s. Titan Industries Ltd. in respect of finished Module Assembly Ronda and Polishing Fixture.

Analysis:
The appeal filed by M/s. Titan Industries Ltd. raised the issue of whether they had filed the necessary declaration under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules for capital goods credit concerning finished Module Assembly Ronda and Polishing Fixture. The appellant's representative argued that they had indeed filed the required declarations mentioning the relevant items. They contended that the items they declared, such as Module and Polishing Fixture, were essential for their manufacturing processes and should qualify for capital goods credit. They also highlighted that the Tribunal had previously allowed credit for similar items, emphasizing that the nomenclature differences should not affect the eligibility for credit.

The respondent's representative countered the appellant's arguments by stressing the mandatory requirement of filing accurate declarations for availing capital goods credit. They pointed out discrepancies between the items declared by the appellant and those mentioned in the supplier invoices, arguing that the mismatch could invalidate the credit claim. The respondent cited a previous Tribunal decision to support the argument that strict compliance with the rules regarding documentation is crucial for claiming Modvat credit, implying that any deviations could render the claim invalid.

After considering the submissions from both sides, the judge noted that the appellant had indeed filed declarations for the Module and Polishing Fixture, even though the items were described differently in the supplier invoices. The judge acknowledged that discrepancies in nomenclature are common in business transactions and should not automatically disqualify the appellant from claiming capital goods credit. As long as the products received align with the items declared, the credit should not be denied based solely on naming variations. Therefore, the judge ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that they had fulfilled the requirements of Rule 57Q by filing the necessary declarations and were eligible for capital goods credit for the Module and Polishing Fixture. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in favor of M/s. Titan Industries Ltd.