https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95593 Modvat credit was considered admissible where M.S. Channels were declared under the residual category "others" with the correct sub-heading, even though they were not named separately in the Rule 57G declaration. The relevant classification period showed no separate specific sub-heading for M.S. Channels, and the claim was supported by challan-cum-invoice documents, certified duty payment, and undisputed receipt and use in manufacture. On that basis, the declaration was treated as sufficient and denial of credit for lack of specific naming was not justified. The connected penalty was also set aside. en-us Fri, 03 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Dec 2011 16:23:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95593 Modvat credit was considered admissible where M.S. Channels were declared under the residual category "others" with the correct sub-heading, even though they were not named separately in the Rule 57G declaration. The relevant classification period showed no separate specific sub-heading for M.S. Channels, and the claim was supported by challan-cum-invoice documents, certified duty payment, and undisputed receipt and use in manufacture. On that basis, the declaration was treated as sufficient and denial of credit for lack of specific naming was not justified. The connected penalty was also set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 03 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95593