https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270408 Permission for duty-free clearance of processed yarn to a job worker was treated as continuing under the successor excise regime, and the assessee's own unit could function as the job worker for the permitted processing and return of goods. The Tribunal accepted the contemporaneous correspondence and the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner's permission, and found that the department had not displaced the assessee's claim. It also held that the movement of yarn and fabric between the two units was covered by the relevant notifications. On that basis, duty-free removal to the assessee's own factory was upheld and the departmental objection for want of permission failed. en-us Fri, 30 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Oct 2016 10:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270408 Permission for duty-free clearance of processed yarn to a job worker was treated as continuing under the successor excise regime, and the assessee's own unit could function as the job worker for the permitted processing and return of goods. The Tribunal accepted the contemporaneous correspondence and the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner's permission, and found that the department had not displaced the assessee's claim. It also held that the movement of yarn and fabric between the two units was covered by the relevant notifications. On that basis, duty-free removal to the assessee's own factory was upheld and the departmental objection for want of permission failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 30 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270408