https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294644 Non-return of scrap or machining loss from a job worker's premises did not, by itself, sustain duty demand because there was no evidence of removal without payment of duty or retention of the remnants by the job worker. The department's tariff classification also failed, as the goods had to be assessed on their true nature and the competing headings were not properly examined on merits. The surviving disputes over credit availment, reversal on returned goods, proof of duty payment on returned and scrapped goods, and refund procedure were remanded for fresh adjudication on the material already placed before the original authority. en-us Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 May 2021 10:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294644 Non-return of scrap or machining loss from a job worker's premises did not, by itself, sustain duty demand because there was no evidence of removal without payment of duty or retention of the remnants by the job worker. The department's tariff classification also failed, as the goods had to be assessed on their true nature and the competing headings were not properly examined on merits. The surviving disputes over credit availment, reversal on returned goods, proof of duty payment on returned and scrapped goods, and refund procedure were remanded for fresh adjudication on the material already placed before the original authority. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 18 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294644