<?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>2004 (11) TMI 449 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115155</link>
    <description>Rule 57F(3), as amended from 16-3-1995, allowed a job worker to clear goods for home consumption on payment of duty. Where the job worker had already paid duty on the inputs processed under that rule, it was not justified to insist that the goods must first be received back in the assessee&#039;s factory and that duty be paid again by the assessee. On that basis, the duty demand and penalty were held unsustainable, and the appeal succeeded for the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 12:57:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152154" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (11) TMI 449 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115155</link>
      <description>Rule 57F(3), as amended from 16-3-1995, allowed a job worker to clear goods for home consumption on payment of duty. Where the job worker had already paid duty on the inputs processed under that rule, it was not justified to insist that the goods must first be received back in the assessee&#039;s factory and that duty be paid again by the assessee. On that basis, the duty demand and penalty were held unsustainable, and the appeal succeeded for the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115155</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>