<?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>2003 (4) TMI 343 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107510</link>
    <description>Purification of chemicals on a job-work basis was treated as manufacture because the process rendered the goods marketable and produced a commercially distinct article under the relevant tariff definition and Chapter Note 11 to Chapter 29. The return of the purified goods to the same customer did not affect excisability, so central excise duty was upheld on the manufacturing activity. Valuation, however, could not be sustained on factory-gate values of comparable goods for job-work clearances; duty, interest, limitation-related determination and the connected penalty were therefore sent back for fresh adjudication on a proper valuation basis, after disclosure of relied-upon material and a fresh hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 11:12:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144527" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (4) TMI 343 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107510</link>
      <description>Purification of chemicals on a job-work basis was treated as manufacture because the process rendered the goods marketable and produced a commercially distinct article under the relevant tariff definition and Chapter Note 11 to Chapter 29. The return of the purified goods to the same customer did not affect excisability, so central excise duty was upheld on the manufacturing activity. Valuation, however, could not be sustained on factory-gate values of comparable goods for job-work clearances; duty, interest, limitation-related determination and the connected penalty were therefore sent back for fresh adjudication on a proper valuation basis, after disclosure of relied-upon material and a fresh hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107510</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>