9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 541X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... having the factory and is also not registered. The principal had also not filed the declaration with jurisdiction of Central Excise Authority undertaking to used the goods received from the Job Worker for manufacturer of dutiable goods - as the principal does not have a factory or registration he would not fulfill requirements of N/N. 83/94-CE. In instants case, Power of Attorney holders of his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 08/2003-CE. The appellant were also engaged in undertaking Job Work for another party and were claiming of Notification No. 83/94-CE. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellant denying them the benefit of Notification No. 83/94-CE on the ground that the Principle manufactures who supplied them, the goods for Job Work neither had any factory nor manufacturing facilities and was also not reg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of Tribunal in the case of M/s Auto Valves and Engine Components Ltd 2017-TIOL-1022-CESTAT-MUM. He argue that in identical circumstances Tribunal as held the Job worker is liable to pay duty. 4. We have gone through the rival submissions. We find that the principal who had supplied the goods for Job work is not having the factory and is also not registered. The principal had also not filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merely procedural undertaking but substantive undertaking in so far as by virtue of this undertaking, the principal manufacturer takes the responsibility of duty liability in case it arose. Thus, in the instant case, the benefit of these notifications cannot be extended to the appellants as the said undertakings have not been given by the appellant. The activity carried out by the appellant has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
