https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93538 Modvat credit was denied where the declaration referred to C.I. ingot moulds but the duty-paying documents described slag pots, because the two were treated as distinct goods rather than a minor misdescription. The mere fact that both items fell under the same chapter heading was held insufficient, since the protection for technical lapses applies only when the declaration and documents broadly match and the inputs are genuinely comparable. Earlier authority was found inapplicable on those facts. Credit on the slag pots was therefore inadmissible, and the Revenue's appeal succeeded. en-us Mon, 17 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:51:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93538 Modvat credit was denied where the declaration referred to C.I. ingot moulds but the duty-paying documents described slag pots, because the two were treated as distinct goods rather than a minor misdescription. The mere fact that both items fell under the same chapter heading was held insufficient, since the protection for technical lapses applies only when the declaration and documents broadly match and the inputs are genuinely comparable. Earlier authority was found inapplicable on those facts. Credit on the slag pots was therefore inadmissible, and the Revenue's appeal succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 17 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93538