https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105271 Exemption under Notification No. 118/75-C.E. for refractory materials moved from one factory to other factories of the same manufacturer depended on compliance with Chapter X procedure and proof of actual inter-factory use. The record did not establish that the goods removed from the Taloja factory were in fact used in the other factories, and the assessee produced no material on that factual issue. Earlier observations relied on by the assessee were treated as obiter because duty liability was not then in issue. On those facts, there was no basis to interfere with the appellate order or direct remand, and the exemption claim failed. en-us Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Mar 2012 10:47:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105271 Exemption under Notification No. 118/75-C.E. for refractory materials moved from one factory to other factories of the same manufacturer depended on compliance with Chapter X procedure and proof of actual inter-factory use. The record did not establish that the goods removed from the Taloja factory were in fact used in the other factories, and the assessee produced no material on that factual issue. Earlier observations relied on by the assessee were treated as obiter because duty liability was not then in issue. On those facts, there was no basis to interfere with the appellate order or direct remand, and the exemption claim failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105271