AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (2) TMI 481
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... raw-materials required for the manufacture of their final product. The appellant had imported Beta Napthol under DEEC and Target Plus Scheme. The said imported goods was removed under Job work challan for conversion into Gamma Acid to M/s. Bondal Chemical Ltd and M/s Shivam Chemicals, Vapi and M/s. Shree Chemicals, Vapi. After processing the said imported goods, they sent back Gamma Acid on their sales invoices. The case of the department is that since the Beta Napthol was cleared under DEEC and Target Plus Scheme under Notification No. 93/2004-Customs dated 10.09.2004 and Notification No. 32/2005-Customs dated 08.04.2005, as per the said notifications there is a condition that the license under Advance Authorization Scheme/ certificate un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the appellant to the job-worker nor the same was purchased back by the appellant from the job worker. He submits that in case of job-work the goods is neither sold nor transferred otherwise, therefore, the condition of the notification has not been contravened. He further submits that the same transaction was held as job work by the Commissioner (Appeals) in their own case vide order dated 21.09.2011 and the said order was accepted by the Revenue, therefore, the nature of the transaction as job-work has been endorsed by the department. He further submits that in the appellant's own case under the same nature of transaction where the job-worker has cleared the job-work goods on payment of duty, the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case reported as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e records. We find that the limited issue in the present case is that whether the transaction of supply of imported Beta Napthol to the job worker and received back Gamma Acid after job work is amount to sale of imported goods or otherwise to the job worker and consequently whether the appellant is entitled for Exemption under Notification No. 93/2004-Customs dated 10.09.2004 and Notification No. 32/2005-Customs dated 08.04.2005 issued under Advance Authorization Scheme and/or Target Plus Scheme. 6. From the facts of the case, we find that the appellant removed Beta Napthol to their job workers under cover of Annexure-II challan. As per the said challan the goods supplied for job work is returnable in the form of processed goods i.e. Gam....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er or to any other person. Therefore, we have no hesitation to conclude that the transaction of the Beta Napthol by the appellant to the job worker does not fall under the term either "sale" or "transferred in other manner". Therefore, in our considered view there is no contravention of the condition attached to the Notification No. 93/2004-Customs dated 10.09.2004 and Notification No. 32/2005-Customs dated 08.04.2005. 7. We further observed that in the appellant's own case the same transaction has been endorsed as job work in the order of Commissioner (Appeals) dated 21.09.2011 which has been accepted by the Revenue. The Adjudicating Authority has brushed aside the said order not on merit but mentioning that the order of the Commissione....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted from out sourcing goods imported duty free for manufacturing to other persons even in the said case the goods imported duty free under DEEC scheme was sold to job worker on cost basis and returned as sale by Job Worker after processing/conversion of cost of other material and labour basis. The tribunal held that this was not violative of the prohibition of selling/transferring such goods. The present case is on a better footing as admittedly the appellant has neither sold Beta Napthol to the job worker nor purchased back the same from job worker. 10. As regard the judgment relied upon by Learned Authorized Representative on careful reading of the same we find that as regard Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgment in the case of Prestige Engin....