https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4266 The article examines excise duty exposure on intermediate goods processed by job workers where inputs were sent without availing Modvat credit and the final products were exempt. It discusses Notification No. 214/86-C.E. and distinguishes Rule 57F of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 on the basis that the cited precedent concerned movement of duty-credit inputs, not exempt final products without input credit. The stated legal point is that, on these facts, the job-work exemption is inapplicable, yet the principal manufacturer is not treated as liable to pay duty on the processed intermediate goods merely because they are otherwise excisable. en-us Tue, 22 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4266 The article examines excise duty exposure on intermediate goods processed by job workers where inputs were sent without availing Modvat credit and the final products were exempt. It discusses Notification No. 214/86-C.E. and distinguishes Rule 57F of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 on the basis that the cited precedent concerned movement of duty-credit inputs, not exempt final products without input credit. The stated legal point is that, on these facts, the job-work exemption is inapplicable, yet the principal manufacturer is not treated as liable to pay duty on the processed intermediate goods merely because they are otherwise excisable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4266