2019 (11) TMI 953

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urers under the job work challan and the same was duly accounted for in the statutory registers. Based upon the audit objection, the department denied benefit of Notification No. 214/86-CE dated 25.03.1986 to the appellant on the ground that principal manufacturers have not complied with the conditions stipulated in the said notification inasmuch as the principal manufacturers have not filed required undertaking. The demand was confirmed for the longer period. 2. Shri Anandodaya Mishra, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that there is no lapse on the part of the appellant. They have received the raw material under job work challans and after processes on job worked goods, the same were returned to the principal ma....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng from 2014 and despite this, the demand for the period 2014 is also confirmed, which is absolutely incorrect. He submits that the Principal Manufacturers have submitted affidavit with regard to the undertaking required under Notification No. 214/86-CE. It is his submission that despite the appellant's claim that Principal Manufacturers clearing their final products wherein the job worked goods are used, on payment of duty, the department has not made any effort to consider the fact of payment of duty, demand is not sustainable on this ground. He placed reliance on the following judgments:- (a) Uniworth Textiles Limited vs. CCE, Raipur - 2013 (1) TMI 616 (b) Cosmic Dye Chemical vs. CCE, Bombay - 1994 (9) TMI 86 (c) CCE, Hyderabad ....