<?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 (9) TMI 804 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443182</link>
    <description>In job-work clearances to a principal manufacturer, duty was not payable on the processed goods where inputs were supplied under job-work challans, no credit was taken on those inputs, and the principal manufacturer discharged duty on the final products. Cenvat credit reversal was also not required where inputs were cleared on payment of duty despite not being physically received in the factory, because the duty-paid clearance was treated as sufficient reversal. The value of drawings and design supplied and borne by the principal manufacturer was not includible in the job-worker&#039;s assessable value, as the proposed addition rested on estimated figures and was unsupported on the facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2023 08:01:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=726442" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (9) TMI 804 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443182</link>
      <description>In job-work clearances to a principal manufacturer, duty was not payable on the processed goods where inputs were supplied under job-work challans, no credit was taken on those inputs, and the principal manufacturer discharged duty on the final products. Cenvat credit reversal was also not required where inputs were cleared on payment of duty despite not being physically received in the factory, because the duty-paid clearance was treated as sufficient reversal. The value of drawings and design supplied and borne by the principal manufacturer was not includible in the job-worker&#039;s assessable value, as the proposed addition rested on estimated figures and was unsupported on the facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443182</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>