Modvat credit survives mere tariff classification mismatch where inputs were otherwise duly declared.

Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because the tariff heading in the declaration differs from the classification in the Bill of Entry or customs papers, where the inputs were otherwise duly declared by description and classification. A variation in heading, by itself, is not enough to defeat credit when the goods are covered by prior declaration and the substantive factual basis for credit is established. The cited Revenue authorities were treated as inapplicable on those facts, and the stated principle is that technical classification mismatch does not override proper declaration of inputs.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit on the inputs was liable to be denied merely because the tariff heading/classification shown in the declaration differed from the classification adopted in the Bill of Entry or by the customs authorities, where the inputs were duly declared.

Analysis: The inputs in question were found to have been declared by description and classification in the relevant documents. The difference in tariff heading between the declaration and the Bill of Entry was not treated as a ground to deny credit, particularly where the goods were covered by prior declaration. The cited decisions for the Revenue were held to be inapplicable on the facts, and the reasoning followed the view that a variation in tariff heading, by itself, does not defeat Modvat credit when the inputs are otherwise duly declared.

Conclusion: The credit was rightly allowed to the assessee, and the Revenue's challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The order granting Modvat credit was sustained, and the Revenue appeal was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where inputs are duly declared, a mere difference in tariff classification or heading does not, by itself, justify denial of Modvat credit.

---