https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209955 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision, ruling in favor of the respondents in a dispute over duty liability for imported yarn used in job work for texturising under Notification No.34/94-CE. The judgment clarified that duty exemption is subject to proof of export satisfaction by the Assistant Commissioner, placing the responsibility on the merchant exporter rather than the job workers. Despite the lack of actual export by the merchant exporter, duty liability rests with them as per legal provisions. The case highlighted the division of duty responsibility between merchant exporters and job workers in fulfilling export requirements. en-us Fri, 24 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Jul 2013 15:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209955 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision, ruling in favor of the respondents in a dispute over duty liability for imported yarn used in job work for texturising under Notification No.34/94-CE. The judgment clarified that duty exemption is subject to proof of export satisfaction by the Assistant Commissioner, placing the responsibility on the merchant exporter rather than the job workers. Despite the lack of actual export by the merchant exporter, duty liability rests with them as per legal provisions. The case highlighted the division of duty responsibility between merchant exporters and job workers in fulfilling export requirements. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 24 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209955