Strict compliance with exemption conditions bars job-worker relief; later circular could not apply retrospectively.

Exemption for a job worker under Notification No. 214/86-C.E. was available only on strict compliance with its conditions, including proof that the finished goods suffered duty and that the final manufacturer discharged the duty liability. The record did not establish such compliance, so the exemption could not be extended on the basis of claimed practice or unsupported assertions. A later circular placing duty liability on the final manufacturer in job-work situations was subordinate to the notification and could not be applied retrospectively to an earlier period. The demand against the job worker was therefore upheld and the order denying exemption was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant, being a job worker, was entitled to exemption from duty under Notification No. 214/86-C.E. and to rely upon Circular No. 306/22/97-CX. for the period in question.

Analysis: The Notification granted benefit only upon fulfilment of its prescribed conditions, including proof that the finished goods suffered duty and that the ultimate manufacturer discharged the duty liability. The record did not establish compliance with those conditions, and the benefit could not be extended merely on the basis of claimed practice or unsubstantiated assertions. The Circular, which placed the duty liability on the manufacturer of the final goods in job-work situations under Rule 57F(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, was held to be subordinate to the Notification and, in any event, could not be applied retrospectively to a period prior to its date.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to the notification benefit or the claimed circular-based relief, and the demand against the job worker was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The order denying exemption was sustained, and the appeal failed on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Exemption under a notification can be claimed only on strict fulfilment of its conditions, and a later circular cannot be applied retrospectively to alter duty liability for an earlier period.

---