Modvat credit survives an inadvertent invoice misdescription where duty-paid inputs were actually received and duly declared.

Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because the supplier's invoice carried an incorrect tariff heading when the goods were in fact received as empty cylinders, the description and assessable value matched those cylinders, and the inputs were covered by the Rule 57G declaration. An inadvertent misdescription in the invoice does not override the substantive position that duty-paid inputs were actually received in the factory. On that basis, entitlement to credit was upheld, the denial was held unjustified, and the impugned orders were set aside with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied on empty cylinders received as inputs merely because the supplier's invoice mentioned an incorrect tariff heading, when the goods were otherwise described as empty cylinders and were declared in the Rule 57G declaration.

Analysis: The invoices were scrutinized and the goods were described as empty cylinders of different capacities. The assessable value also corresponded to empty cylinders and not to complete fire extinguishers. The incorrect tariff heading in the supplier's invoice was found to be inadvertent. Since the receipt of the duty-paid inputs in the factory was not in dispute and the inputs were covered by the declaration, a wrong description or tariff heading in the invoice could not, by itself, defeat the credit.

Conclusion: The denial of Modvat credit was not justified and the assessee was entitled to the credit.

Final Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside and the appeal succeeded with consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where duty-paid inputs are actually received and duly declared, a mere inadvertent tariff classification or misdescription in the supplier's invoice does not extinguish entitlement to Modvat credit.

---