https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118773 Capital goods sent to a job worker for further processing fell within Rule 57AC(5)(a), provided they were returned within 180 days and the movement was supported by proper records and documents. The phrase "further processing" was read in line with manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, so any process undertaken to complete manufacture was covered. A narrow interpretation excluding such movement was held inconsistent with Circular No. 637/28/2002-CX, which recognised removal of capital goods to a job worker's premises for manufacturing processes. On that basis, CENVAT credit was available. en-us Mon, 08 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jul 2012 16:15:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118773 Capital goods sent to a job worker for further processing fell within Rule 57AC(5)(a), provided they were returned within 180 days and the movement was supported by proper records and documents. The phrase "further processing" was read in line with manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, so any process undertaken to complete manufacture was covered. A narrow interpretation excluding such movement was held inconsistent with Circular No. 637/28/2002-CX, which recognised removal of capital goods to a job worker's premises for manufacturing processes. On that basis, CENVAT credit was available. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 08 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118773