https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381425 The coating of imported fire-retardant chemicals on fabrics at job workers' premises was treated as permitted job work under Notification No. 52/2003-Cus because the chemicals were sent under Development Commissioner permission, the movement and return of processed fabrics were accounted for, and the fabrics were either procured by the appellant or supported by CT-3 documentation. Applying a liberal construction of "job work" under Rule 2(n) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the analysis accepted that job work may include situations where the job worker procures part of the raw material. As there was no allegation of diversion or unaccounted clearance, the customs duty, interest, and penalty demand was unsustainable. en-us Mon, 25 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jan 2020 14:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381425 The coating of imported fire-retardant chemicals on fabrics at job workers' premises was treated as permitted job work under Notification No. 52/2003-Cus because the chemicals were sent under Development Commissioner permission, the movement and return of processed fabrics were accounted for, and the fabrics were either procured by the appellant or supported by CT-3 documentation. Applying a liberal construction of "job work" under Rule 2(n) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the analysis accepted that job work may include situations where the job worker procures part of the raw material. As there was no allegation of diversion or unaccounted clearance, the customs duty, interest, and penalty demand was unsustainable. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 25 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381425