https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85515 Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because an input is described differently in the declaration and in the invoice or bill of entry, where the item declared and the item received are in substance the same and are actually used for the declared purpose. The text applies a substantive compliance approach: technical particulars matched, the goods were popularly known by different descriptions in different markets, and the declaration was sufficiently specific for the Modvat scheme. A mere variation in commercial or technical nomenclature was treated as non-fatal, so eligibility for credit remained intact. en-us Tue, 09 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Aug 2011 15:49:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85515 Modvat credit cannot be denied merely because an input is described differently in the declaration and in the invoice or bill of entry, where the item declared and the item received are in substance the same and are actually used for the declared purpose. The text applies a substantive compliance approach: technical particulars matched, the goods were popularly known by different descriptions in different markets, and the declaration was sufficiently specific for the Modvat scheme. A mere variation in commercial or technical nomenclature was treated as non-fatal, so eligibility for credit remained intact. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 09 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85515