https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84944 MODVAT credit could not be denied where the Rule 57G declaration described the input in broad terms but omitted that the wire was zinc-coated, because both coated and uncoated wire were specified inputs under the same tariff sub-heading. The department had already accepted the declarations and gate passes, and there was no allegation that a non-specified input was used or that the substantive conditions for credit were unmet. A minor descriptive discrepancy was treated as a technical defect only, insufficient to defeat the accrued entitlement. The denial of MODVAT credit was therefore unsustainable. en-us Wed, 14 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Aug 2011 16:54:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84944 MODVAT credit could not be denied where the Rule 57G declaration described the input in broad terms but omitted that the wire was zinc-coated, because both coated and uncoated wire were specified inputs under the same tariff sub-heading. The department had already accepted the declarations and gate passes, and there was no allegation that a non-specified input was used or that the substantive conditions for credit were unmet. A minor descriptive discrepancy was treated as a technical defect only, insufficient to defeat the accrued entitlement. The denial of MODVAT credit was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 14 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84944