<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1998 (10) TMI 243 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90806</link>
    <description>Hollow screws manufactured by a job worker from inputs supplied by the principal manufacturer under Rule 57F(2) were treated as goods remaining within the principal manufacturer&#039;s production chain for excise and small-scale exemption purposes. The settled principle noted is that transfer of inputs to a job worker need not be absolute, and job-work clearance does not by itself make the goods non-excisable or deny exemption. The Trade Notice on job-work clearances supported this view, and the lower authority&#039;s insistence that the job worker comply with excise formalities as if manufacturing independently for sale was found unsustainable. On that basis, the demand and penalty were not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:46:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127868" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (10) TMI 243 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90806</link>
      <description>Hollow screws manufactured by a job worker from inputs supplied by the principal manufacturer under Rule 57F(2) were treated as goods remaining within the principal manufacturer&#039;s production chain for excise and small-scale exemption purposes. The settled principle noted is that transfer of inputs to a job worker need not be absolute, and job-work clearance does not by itself make the goods non-excisable or deny exemption. The Trade Notice on job-work clearances supported this view, and the lower authority&#039;s insistence that the job worker comply with excise formalities as if manufacturing independently for sale was found unsustainable. On that basis, the demand and penalty were not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90806</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>