Modvat credit cannot be denied for mere nomenclature differences when records show the same declared input.

Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the invoice described the input as "Fourdrinier Wire Cloth Open Ended" while the declaration used the term "Phosphor Bronze Wire Cloth". On comparison of the invoice, the supplier's classification list, and the manufacturer's certificate, the two descriptions were found to refer to the same input, so the alleged mismatch in nomenclature was not established. The denial of credit on that ground was therefore not sustainable, and the assessee was held entitled to relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit was deniable on the ground that the input described in the invoice as "Fourdrinier Wire Cloth Open Ended" was not covered by the declaration filed under Rule 57G.

Analysis: The description in the invoice was compared with the declaration, the supplier's classification list, and the manufacturer's certificate. On that material, the input described as "Fourdrinier Wire Cloth Open Ended" was found to be the same as "Phosphor Bronze Wire Cloth" declared by the assessee. The alleged discrepancy in nomenclature was therefore not established.

Conclusion: The denial of Modvat credit on the ground of mismatch in description was not sustainable and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the assessee was held entitled to the relief sought.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the invoice description, supported by the supplier's classification and certificate, shows that the input is the same as the declared input, Modvat credit cannot be denied merely on a verbal variation in nomenclature.

---