<?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>2010 (2) TMI 1263 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200057</link>
    <description>The duty liability on scrap generated in a job worker&#039;s premises and retained by the job worker was the central issue in this case. The Adjudicating Authority initially upheld the duty demand, penalties, and interest, which was later overturned by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Revenue&#039;s appeal was based on previous Tribunal decisions, arguing for duty liability on the scrap. However, the court found that since the scrap was not returned to the respondent&#039;s factory, the duty liability could not be imposed on them. Citing relevant case law, the court ruled in favor of the respondent, rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2018 10:56:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=513382" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 1263 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200057</link>
      <description>The duty liability on scrap generated in a job worker&#039;s premises and retained by the job worker was the central issue in this case. The Adjudicating Authority initially upheld the duty demand, penalties, and interest, which was later overturned by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Revenue&#039;s appeal was based on previous Tribunal decisions, arguing for duty liability on the scrap. However, the court found that since the scrap was not returned to the respondent&#039;s factory, the duty liability could not be imposed on them. Citing relevant case law, the court ruled in favor of the respondent, rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200057</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>