Proforma credit cannot be denied for a clerical tariff reference error where product identity and substantive entitlement remain unchanged.

Proforma credit under Rule 56A could not be denied merely because the notification continued to cite the old tariff sub-heading after the classification changed, where the final product and raw material remained the same. The later corrective amendment showed that the incorrect reference was inadvertent, and the benefit intended for the same product remained substantively available. The omission was treated as clerical, so entitlement to proforma credit for the disputed period was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether proforma credit under Rule 56A could be denied for the period 1-3-1989 to 16-5-1989 merely because the notification continued to mention the old tariff sub-heading for creamy snuff after the tariff classification had been changed.

Analysis: The description and nature of the final product, as well as the raw material, remained unchanged. The later amendment to the notification correcting the sub-heading supported the view that the omission to update the tariff reference during the intervening period was inadvertent. A benefit intended for the same product could not be denied on such a minor technicality when the substantive entitlement remained unaffected.

Conclusion: The omission was only clerical, and the assessee was entitled to proforma credit for the disputed period.

---