https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94729 An adjudication order was found unsustainable because it did not engage with the cited Tribunal precedent or determine when the DG sets reached the stage of fully manufactured excisable goods. The reasoning also failed to fix the date on which the RG 1 stage was attained, even though deemed removal for captive consumption under Rule 49 could arise only after manufacture was complete. As the central issue was left without findings or explanation, the order was treated as non-speaking and was set aside, with the matter remanded for fresh consideration and determination of the relevant manufacture date. en-us Tue, 23 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Dec 2011 13:38:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94729 An adjudication order was found unsustainable because it did not engage with the cited Tribunal precedent or determine when the DG sets reached the stage of fully manufactured excisable goods. The reasoning also failed to fix the date on which the RG 1 stage was attained, even though deemed removal for captive consumption under Rule 49 could arise only after manufacture was complete. As the central issue was left without findings or explanation, the order was treated as non-speaking and was set aside, with the matter remanded for fresh consideration and determination of the relevant manufacture date. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 23 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94729