https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384767 Under Rule 12B of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, where the rule prescribed no mandatory form for opting duty discharge and the job-worker had already paid duty, the department could not re-fastened the same liability on the principal manufacturer on an inconsistent valuation basis. Duty was also not recoverable again on transfer of duty-paid processed goods to another unit for further manufacture, because no fresh manufacture attracting levy was shown at that stage. The impugned order was set aside and no duty demand survived on the issues decided. en-us Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Aug 2019 07:28:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384767 Under Rule 12B of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, where the rule prescribed no mandatory form for opting duty discharge and the job-worker had already paid duty, the department could not re-fastened the same liability on the principal manufacturer on an inconsistent valuation basis. Duty was also not recoverable again on transfer of duty-paid processed goods to another unit for further manufacture, because no fresh manufacture attracting levy was shown at that stage. The impugned order was set aside and no duty demand survived on the issues decided. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384767