https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3329 Substantial compliance with Notification No. 214/86-CE protected the job worker where inputs were received under Rule 57F(4) challans, the processed goods were returned to the principal manufacturer, and the required declaration had been filed. Although the principal manufacturer did not pay duty at the time of clearance, the duty was later paid and accepted by the department. That later payment did not justify fastening duty or interest on the job worker, and the notification benefit could not be denied. en-us Thu, 01 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3329 Substantial compliance with Notification No. 214/86-CE protected the job worker where inputs were received under Rule 57F(4) challans, the processed goods were returned to the principal manufacturer, and the required declaration had been filed. Although the principal manufacturer did not pay duty at the time of clearance, the duty was later paid and accepted by the department. That later payment did not justify fastening duty or interest on the job worker, and the notification benefit could not be denied. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 01 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3329