1988 (4) TMI 82

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nufacturers of plywood. It is the specific case of the petitioner that it peels 'timber in log form' on job work basis for Veneer Mills Private Limited, a Central Excise assessee for manufacture of plywood. The Superintendent of Customs and Central Excise, Jaipur issued a show cause notice on the petitioner saying that the petitioner had cleared commercial veneer (Tariff Item No. 68) without payment of duty and thus had contravened Rules 173F and 9(1) of Central Excise Rules. It is the case of the petitioner that in terms of Notification No. 119/75-C.E. Excise Duty will be charged only on the amount realised as job charges by the petitioners. 3. By the impugned order dated 31st January 1981 passed by the Assistant Collector, Customs & Ce....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tition accordingly ought not and should not have been entertained. It is however, placed on record that for exemption under the aforementioned notification, the following tests are to be satisfied: (a) An article is required to be moved from a supplier for certain processing work to job worker: (b) The job worker should do certain processing on that article; (c) That article should be returned back to supplier after job work. 7. Having heard the learned Advocates for both the sides and considering the materials on record, this Court finds that the points as to job worker and the Notification No. 119/75-C.E. and the scope of the Item No. 68 have been considered in a decision reported in 1983 E.L.T. 876 (Cal.) (Associated Pigments....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... illegally collected in disregard of exemption granted by Notification No. 119/75-C.E., to the lower authorities. 10. On perusing all the materials on record and considering all the pros and cons and also the above reported decision, this Court finds that the petitioner herein has been able to substantiate its claim on merit that it is entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 119/75-C.E. Since the petitioner has put the case on merit, this Court does not appreciate that the ends of justice would be met by sending the petitioner to seek alternative remedies to the authorities concerned in another forum. This Court further finds that during the pendency of the present Rule, excise duty was illegally levied or realised from the petitione....