Job-work duty demand depends on verified documentary chain; procedural lapses alone do not defeat a lawful job-work arrangement.

A job-work arrangement supported by challans, statements and a Chartered Accountant's certificate required factual verification before any duty demand on intermediate goods could be sustained. The text states that, under Rule 57F(2)/(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Notification No. 214/86-CE, procedural lapses in movement formalities do not by themselves defeat a permissible job-work chain if the movement of semi-processed goods, return of processed goods and final duty payment can be correlated on record. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh verification, with the adjudication set aside and no final affirmation of duty on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the duty demand on intermediate goods and job-worked goods was sustainable when the assessee claimed movement of semi-processed goods to the job worker, return of processed goods, and clearance of the final product on payment of duty, and whether the matter required remand for verification of the supporting records.

Analysis: The dispute turned on the claimed job-work chain and the accompanying documents, including challans, statements and Chartered Accountant's certificate. The prior remand required the lower authority to verify those materials; a later rejection of the documents merely because they were produced after the inquiry stage was not a proper approach. The procedural lapses in following the prescribed job-work formalities did not, by themselves, determine the duty liability if the movement of goods and final duty payment could be correlated on the record. Under the job-work scheme contemplated by Rule 57F(2)/(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and Notification No. 214/86-CE, the liability on the intermediate stage would not survive if the factual chain was established.

Conclusion: The matter was required to be remanded for fresh verification of the documents and statements and for de novo adjudication. The duty demand was not finally affirmed on merits.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded to the extent that the impugned adjudication was set aside and the matter was sent back for reconsideration after verification of the job-work records and granting personal hearing.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a job-work transaction is supported by documentary evidence and the lower authority is required by remand directions to verify that evidence, duty cannot be conclusively fastened without such verification, and procedural lapses in prescribed movement formalities do not by themselves defeat a legally permissible job-work arrangement.

---