https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93386 Goods sent to job workers and received back after minor ancillary operations such as punching and drilling were not treated as having been manufactured by the assessee merely because of those later processes. The commentary states that Rule 57F(2) was not limited to cases where the process did not amount to manufacture, and that identification of the intermediate goods through the prescribed challan procedure was sufficient. It also notes that the job workers' own position as manufacturers supported the view that the manufacturing stage had already been completed earlier. On that basis, the duty demand and penalties were not sustainable. en-us Wed, 02 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 13:09:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93386 Goods sent to job workers and received back after minor ancillary operations such as punching and drilling were not treated as having been manufactured by the assessee merely because of those later processes. The commentary states that Rule 57F(2) was not limited to cases where the process did not amount to manufacture, and that identification of the intermediate goods through the prescribed challan procedure was sufficient. It also notes that the job workers' own position as manufacturers supported the view that the manufacturing stage had already been completed earlier. On that basis, the duty demand and penalties were not sustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 02 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93386