<?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>DUTY LIABILITY WHEN TRANSACTION IS ON PRINCIPAL TO PRINCIPAL BASIS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=861</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found no evidentiary basis that the Hard Ground Powder (HGP) possesses bonding strength, usable-length asbestos fibres, or properties making it a distinct marketable product; it noted HGP was inert pulverised asbestos-cement waste produced largely for environmental disposal. Because grinding was undertaken by independent job workers on a principal-to-principal basis, the Tribunal applied the principle that any duty liability would rest with the job workers rather than the principal manufacturer, and it rejected the Department&#039;s procedural objection to raising job-worker liability at the appellate stage.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2011 15:02:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=301374" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>DUTY LIABILITY WHEN TRANSACTION IS ON PRINCIPAL TO PRINCIPAL BASIS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=861</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found no evidentiary basis that the Hard Ground Powder (HGP) possesses bonding strength, usable-length asbestos fibres, or properties making it a distinct marketable product; it noted HGP was inert pulverised asbestos-cement waste produced largely for environmental disposal. Because grinding was undertaken by independent job workers on a principal-to-principal basis, the Tribunal applied the principle that any duty liability would rest with the job workers rather than the principal manufacturer, and it rejected the Department&#039;s procedural objection to raising job-worker liability at the appellate stage.</description>
      <category>Articles</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=861</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>