https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86388 Bulk tea removed from one factory to another under departmental permission granted under Rule 56B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not later be treated as a contravention of that rule. Once permission had been granted for the movement, the department could not retrospectively allege breach merely because it later viewed the goods as finished product. As duty had already been paid by the consignee unit, the same duty could not be demanded again from the consignor unit. The duty demand against the consignor was therefore unsustainable. en-us Mon, 03 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Aug 2011 15:14:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86388 Bulk tea removed from one factory to another under departmental permission granted under Rule 56B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not later be treated as a contravention of that rule. Once permission had been granted for the movement, the department could not retrospectively allege breach merely because it later viewed the goods as finished product. As duty had already been paid by the consignee unit, the same duty could not be demanded again from the consignor unit. The duty demand against the consignor was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 03 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86388