9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2004 (11) TMI 449 - AT - Central Excise
Issues:
1. Duty liability under Rule 57F(3) for goods sent to job workers. 2. Interpretation of Notification No. 11/95-C.E.(N.T.) dated 16-3-1995. 3. Applicability of duty payment by job workers for home consumption. 4. Imposition of personal penalty and interest. Issue 1: Duty liability under Rule 57F(3) for goods sent to job workers The appellant sent Nylon Filament yarn to job workers for processing to Tyre Cord Fabric without payment of duty under Rule 57F(3). The job worker, instead of returning the goods, cleared them for home consumption on payment of duty. The revenue contended that duty is due from the appellant as the goods were not received back at the factory. The duty amount was confirmed along with a personal penalty and interest. Issue 2: Interpretation of Notification No. 11/95-C.E.(N.T.) dated 16-3-1995 The appellant argued that Notification No. 11/95-C.E.(N.T.) dated 16-3-1995 amended Rule 57F(3) to allow job workers to clear goods for home consumption on payment of duty. They emphasized that duty was paid by the job worker, eliminating the need for duty payment by the appellant. Issue 3: Applicability of duty payment by job workers for home consumption The Tribunal found the appellant's contention valid. The amendment to Rule 57F(3) on 16-3-1995 permitted job workers to clear goods for home consumption after duty payment. Since duty was paid by the job worker, the demand for duty from the appellant was deemed unjustified, leading to the appeal's allowance and relief granted to the appellant. Issue 4: Imposition of personal penalty and interest As the appeal was allowed based on the interpretation of Rule 57F(3) and the notification, the Tribunal disposed of the miscellaneous application for extending the stay order as it became unnecessary. This judgment clarifies the duty liability under Rule 57F(3) for goods sent to job workers, the impact of Notification No. 11/95-C.E.(N.T.) on duty payment, and the applicability of duty payment by job workers for home consumption, ultimately leading to the allowance of the appeal and relief to the appellant.
|
