https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782594 DRI officers were recognised as competent proper officers for Section 28 of the Customs Act, so the jurisdictional objection to the show cause notice failed. Imported goods covered by an actual user exemption and used mainly in the importer's own manufacturing process could be sent to a sister concern for job work after fulfilment of the export obligation without breaching Notification No. 30/97-Cus.; such movement was treated as processing within the same manufacturing arrangement, not a prohibited transfer to another person. The absence of prior permission for job work was regarded as a procedural lapse only, and the duty demand and penalty were not sustainable. en-us Fri, 14 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Dec 2025 08:35:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782594 DRI officers were recognised as competent proper officers for Section 28 of the Customs Act, so the jurisdictional objection to the show cause notice failed. Imported goods covered by an actual user exemption and used mainly in the importer's own manufacturing process could be sent to a sister concern for job work after fulfilment of the export obligation without breaching Notification No. 30/97-Cus.; such movement was treated as processing within the same manufacturing arrangement, not a prohibited transfer to another person. The absence of prior permission for job work was regarded as a procedural lapse only, and the duty demand and penalty were not sustainable. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 14 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782594