https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410547 The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, a manufacturer of organic compounds and enzymes, in a Central Excise duty dispute. The tribunal held that Rule 4(5) of CCR did not apply as the appellant sent a by-product, not the inputs, to a job worker. Emphasizing the distinction between inputs and by-products, the tribunal set aside the order and allowed the appeal, citing lack of evidence and procedural errors. The decision was based on legal interpretations, precedents, and test reports, concluding that there was no suppression by the appellant and no basis for penalty imposition. en-us Tue, 03 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Aug 2022 14:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410547 The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, a manufacturer of organic compounds and enzymes, in a Central Excise duty dispute. The tribunal held that Rule 4(5) of CCR did not apply as the appellant sent a by-product, not the inputs, to a job worker. Emphasizing the distinction between inputs and by-products, the tribunal set aside the order and allowed the appeal, citing lack of evidence and procedural errors. The decision was based on legal interpretations, precedents, and test reports, concluding that there was no suppression by the appellant and no basis for penalty imposition. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 03 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410547