Job-work duty liability rests with the principal manufacturer; tariff classification did not affect the result.

Processed goods received from a principal manufacturer for job work and returned after processing do not attract duty liability on the job worker; the liability rests with the principal manufacturer. The record showed that the principal manufacturer had not been proceeded against and there was no clear material on whether duty had been discharged by it, so the Revenue could not succeed on the job-work basis. The exact tariff classification was not material on these facts and did not justify interference with the order under challenge.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue's challenge could succeed when the goods were processed on job work basis and returned to the principal manufacturer, and whether the classification dispute remained material in the facts of the case.

Analysis: The processed goods were received from the principal manufacturer for job work and were returned after processing. In such a job-work arrangement, the duty liability attaches to the principal manufacturer, and the job worker is not required to pay duty on the goods returned after processing. The record also showed that the principal manufacturer had not been proceeded against, and there was no clear material to show whether duty had or had not been discharged by it. In this background, the dispute over the exact tariff classification did not affect the result and did not warrant interference with the order under challenge.

Conclusion: The Revenue's appeal was rejected, and the assessee succeeded.

---