Modvat credit on inputs upheld where tariff heading matched and a minor sub-heading difference did not defeat receipt and use evidence.

Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the declaration described M.S. hoops under a different sub-heading, where the input strips and declared goods fell under the same tariff heading. Receipt of the strips in the factory, entry in stores records, and use in manufacture of the final product established eligibility, and the sub-heading discrepancy was treated as immaterial. Credit was therefore available on the strips because a correct tariff heading and actual receipt and use of the goods were sufficient to support the claim.

---

---

Issues: Whether Modvat credit could be denied on strips used as inputs merely because the declaration mentioned M.S. hoops under a different sub-heading.

Analysis: The input goods and the declared goods fell under the same tariff heading, and the difference was only in the sub-heading. The strips were received in the factory, entered in the stores records for hoops, and used in the manufacture of the final product. The discrepancy was treated as immaterial in view of the consistent view that a correct tariff heading is sufficient and a minor sub-heading variation should not defeat credit where receipt and use of the goods are established.

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

---