https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101531 Removal of scrap and waste from an export oriented unit, when made with permission and under customs supervision, was treated as lawful clearance rather than clandestine removal of finished goods. The record showed that the goods found at another premises were smaller in dimension and were not proved to be manufactured in the appellant's factory; in the absence of a tariff definition of waste or rejects for granite, the expression was read in trade parlance. Because the seized goods were not established to be the same goods allegedly cleared from the unit, no central excise duty could be fastened on the appellant, and the consequential confiscation and penalties also failed. en-us Fri, 08 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:15:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101531 Removal of scrap and waste from an export oriented unit, when made with permission and under customs supervision, was treated as lawful clearance rather than clandestine removal of finished goods. The record showed that the goods found at another premises were smaller in dimension and were not proved to be manufactured in the appellant's factory; in the absence of a tariff definition of waste or rejects for granite, the expression was read in trade parlance. Because the seized goods were not established to be the same goods allegedly cleared from the unit, no central excise duty could be fastened on the appellant, and the consequential confiscation and penalties also failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 08 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101531