https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445164 Duty on packaging charges was upheld because the invoices and records did not support the claim that the amount was freight, and no transport evidence was produced. CENVAT credit recovery on rejected or returned goods was also sustained because the assessee failed to maintain records of receipt, processing, and disposal as required under Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. By contrast, the processing of aluminium foils by washing, coating with nitro cellulose, and slitting to customer requirements was treated as manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, so reversal of input credit was not justified and the differential duty demand was set aside. en-us Mon, 16 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Nov 2023 16:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445164 Duty on packaging charges was upheld because the invoices and records did not support the claim that the amount was freight, and no transport evidence was produced. CENVAT credit recovery on rejected or returned goods was also sustained because the assessee failed to maintain records of receipt, processing, and disposal as required under Rule 16 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. By contrast, the processing of aluminium foils by washing, coating with nitro cellulose, and slitting to customer requirements was treated as manufacture under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, so reversal of input credit was not justified and the differential duty demand was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 16 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445164