<?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>2004 (3) TMI 275 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53211</link>
    <description>Processed pre-cured tread rubber was not treated as fully manufactured at the job worker&#039;s end because essential finishing operations, including de-flashing, hardness and uniformity testing, and final inspection, were completed by the principal suppliers before despatch. The factual matrix showed that the job worker performed substantial processing and received only job charges, but the goods were not marketable when returned from the job worker. Applying Rule 57F(2) and Rule 57F(3)(b), and the governing test of whether goods had reached a fully manufactured stage, duty and penalty against the job worker were held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Oct 2010 15:58:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91688" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 275 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53211</link>
      <description>Processed pre-cured tread rubber was not treated as fully manufactured at the job worker&#039;s end because essential finishing operations, including de-flashing, hardness and uniformity testing, and final inspection, were completed by the principal suppliers before despatch. The factual matrix showed that the job worker performed substantial processing and received only job charges, but the goods were not marketable when returned from the job worker. Applying Rule 57F(2) and Rule 57F(3)(b), and the governing test of whether goods had reached a fully manufactured stage, duty and penalty against the job worker were held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53211</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>