https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104696 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the input declaration mentioned an incorrect sub-heading when the description of the goods and the relevant tariff entry were otherwise consistent. The declared inputs and the duty-paid goods fell within tariff headings covering pigments, and differing classifications by manufacturers could not be ruled out. Since the discrepancy was confined to the sub-heading and the assessee had no control over the supplier's classification, the substance of the declaration was treated as satisfied. The wrong sub-heading was therefore held immaterial, and Modvat credit remained available. en-us Tue, 22 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Mar 2012 10:26:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104696 Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the input declaration mentioned an incorrect sub-heading when the description of the goods and the relevant tariff entry were otherwise consistent. The declared inputs and the duty-paid goods fell within tariff headings covering pigments, and differing classifications by manufacturers could not be ruled out. Since the discrepancy was confined to the sub-heading and the assessee had no control over the supplier's classification, the substance of the declaration was treated as satisfied. The wrong sub-heading was therefore held immaterial, and Modvat credit remained available. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104696