Modvat credit cannot be denied on a technical sub-heading difference where inputs remain covered by the same notification.

Modvat credit could not be denied where the assessee's revised declaration described the inputs as CR sheets in coil form under a different sub-heading, because both the original and revised inputs fell under Chapter 72 and were covered by the relevant notification. The filing of the revised declaration before availing credit in RG-23A Part II, together with compliance with the prescribed procedure and maintenance of records, was sufficient to sustain the credit. Rule 57H did not assist the Revenue on these facts, and the technical objection to the availment of credit was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied on the ground that the revised declaration described the inputs as CR sheets in coil form under a different sub-heading, although both the original and revised inputs fell under the same chapter heading and were covered by the relevant notification; and whether Rule 57H barred the credit claimed by the assessee.

Analysis: The inputs, namely CR sheets and CR sheets in coil form, were classifiable under Chapter 72 and were declared inputs for purposes of Modvat credit under Notification No. 177/86 dated 1-3-1986. The assessee had filed a revised declaration before availing the credit in RG-23A Part II, and the variation was only with respect to the sub-heading. Since both goods fell within the same chapter heading specified in the notification and the prescribed procedure and records were maintained, the credit could not be denied on a technical objection. The reliance on Rule 57H also did not assist the Revenue in the facts of the case.

Conclusion: Modvat credit was rightly admissible to the assessee and the objection to its availment was not sustainable.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee.

---