<?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>2016 (6) TMI 467 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328758</link>
    <description>In job work carried out under Rule 57F(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, Rule 4(5)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and Notification No. 214/86-CE, the value of materials supplied by the principal manufacturer is not includible in the assessable value of the job-worked goods. The analysis treats the activity as pure job work where the job worker is paid processing charges, while duty on the final product rests with the principal manufacturer. Applying the principle in International Auto Ltd., the supplied valve bodies could not be added to the assessable value of the rubber products manufactured on job work basis, so the duty demand and penalties on that component were unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=431357" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 467 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328758</link>
      <description>In job work carried out under Rule 57F(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, Rule 4(5)(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and Notification No. 214/86-CE, the value of materials supplied by the principal manufacturer is not includible in the assessable value of the job-worked goods. The analysis treats the activity as pure job work where the job worker is paid processing charges, while duty on the final product rests with the principal manufacturer. Applying the principle in International Auto Ltd., the supplied valve bodies could not be added to the assessable value of the rubber products manufactured on job work basis, so the duty demand and penalties on that component were unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>