<?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>2023 (5) TMI 598 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437791</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that duty on process loss during job work, being an invisible loss, cannot be charged to the appellant. Precedents established that duty liability for waste and scrap generated during job work falls on the job worker, not the principal manufacturer. As there was no unreasonable loss claimed by the Revenue and no requirement to compensate for waste and scrap by reversing credit, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 May 2023 08:31:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=713688" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (5) TMI 598 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437791</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that duty on process loss during job work, being an invisible loss, cannot be charged to the appellant. Precedents established that duty liability for waste and scrap generated during job work falls on the job worker, not the principal manufacturer. As there was no unreasonable loss claimed by the Revenue and no requirement to compensate for waste and scrap by reversing credit, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437791</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>