Kim'S Laboratories Vs. Commissioner Of Central Excise,

1. in the order impugned in the appeal, the collector (appeals) has confirmed the finding of the assistant collector impugned before him, that the assessee could not take modvat credit on inputs used in the manufacture of final product for the reason that these inputs had not been specifically described, but were described in general term such as "bulk drugs and organic compound" etc.2. the appellant is absent and unrepresented despite notice. the ground in the appeal is that the failure to declare the specific inputs is only a technical lapse and credit should not, therefore, be denied.decision of the tribunal has been cited in support of this proposition.3. i do not find it possible to agree that failure to declare the inputs is a technical lapse which can be overlooked. the object of the declaration under rule 57a is to advise the department of the nature and kind of the inputs and finished products, so that the department may take appropriate action to safeguard the duty recourse to the provisions of law. that is why the rule has been enacted to say that description in such broad terms. the appellant's contention is unreasonable and cannot be accepted. the decision of the tribunal in aluminium industries ltd. v. cce 1990 (47) elt 28 is that description in a very broad term in insufficient to apply the provisions of rule 57g. i therefore decline to interfere.