https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83702 MODVAT credit could not be denied merely because the declaration described the input as "perfume" while some gate passes and the supplementary declaration referred to odiferous substances under Heading 3302.90. The description in the original declaration was treated as broad enough to cover perfumes and related odiferous mixtures, and the difference in tariff classification was held immaterial where both headings were otherwise eligible for MODVAT benefit. The supplementary declaration reinforced compliance with Rule 57G. On that basis, the declaration was held sufficient, credit was allowed, and the demand for reversal was set aside. en-us Mon, 15 Nov 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Jul 2011 11:13:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83702 MODVAT credit could not be denied merely because the declaration described the input as "perfume" while some gate passes and the supplementary declaration referred to odiferous substances under Heading 3302.90. The description in the original declaration was treated as broad enough to cover perfumes and related odiferous mixtures, and the difference in tariff classification was held immaterial where both headings were otherwise eligible for MODVAT benefit. The supplementary declaration reinforced compliance with Rule 57G. On that basis, the declaration was held sufficient, credit was allowed, and the demand for reversal was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 15 Nov 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83702