https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78268 Confiscation of stock lying in factory premises was found unjustified where the goods were covered by an exemption claim already disclosed to the department and reflected in monthly returns. Mere apprehension that the goods might later be cleared under exemption did not, by itself, justify seizure, confiscation, or penalty. The absence of any confirmed duty demand in the impugned order further weakened the basis for penal action. On those facts, the Tribunal treated both confiscation and penalty as unwarranted and returned relief to the assessee. en-us Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78268 Confiscation of stock lying in factory premises was found unjustified where the goods were covered by an exemption claim already disclosed to the department and reflected in monthly returns. Mere apprehension that the goods might later be cleared under exemption did not, by itself, justify seizure, confiscation, or penalty. The absence of any confirmed duty demand in the impugned order further weakened the basis for penal action. On those facts, the Tribunal treated both confiscation and penalty as unwarranted and returned relief to the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78268