https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85032 The judgment favored the appellants, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. The Tribunal found the descriptions provided by the appellants to be sufficiently descriptive of the inputs for Modvat Credit eligibility. The discrepancy in Tariff classification did not impact the eligibility for Modvat Credit, as the goods were identifiable as plastic articles used in the manufacture of bathroom fittings. en-us Wed, 31 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Aug 2011 13:30:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85032 The judgment favored the appellants, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. The Tribunal found the descriptions provided by the appellants to be sufficiently descriptive of the inputs for Modvat Credit eligibility. The discrepancy in Tariff classification did not impact the eligibility for Modvat Credit, as the goods were identifiable as plastic articles used in the manufacture of bathroom fittings. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 31 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85032