https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174773 The Tribunal remanded the case to the original authority for reconsideration, focusing on determining the correct valuation by job workers, the nature of goods returned, and the applicability of Notification No.214/86. The issue of invoking an extended period for duty payment was left open for fresh consideration. The appellant's argument that Rule 57S permits removal of capital goods to job workers without reversing credit was rejected, as the Tribunal found that a new product emerged due to manufacture by job workers, making the appellant ineligible for credit under Section 57S conditions. en-us Tue, 06 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:07:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174773 The Tribunal remanded the case to the original authority for reconsideration, focusing on determining the correct valuation by job workers, the nature of goods returned, and the applicability of Notification No.214/86. The issue of invoking an extended period for duty payment was left open for fresh consideration. The appellant's argument that Rule 57S permits removal of capital goods to job workers without reversing credit was rejected, as the Tribunal found that a new product emerged due to manufacture by job workers, making the appellant ineligible for credit under Section 57S conditions. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 06 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174773