<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2002 (9) TMI 609 - CEGAT, EKOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106726</link>
    <description>Duty-paid goods manufactured by another unit and brought into an assessee&#039;s factory, where they are different from the goods manufactured in that factory, do not by themselves justify confiscation or penalty under the Central Excise Rules. The Tribunal rejected the view that permission requirements applied only where both units belonged to the same manufacturer, and held that the appellant&#039;s request to receive branded goods for removal with its own products was not invalid merely because one supplier was not named. Since the goods were covered by invoice and were admittedly duty-paid, confiscation and penalty were not warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:27:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=143746" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (9) TMI 609 - CEGAT, EKOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106726</link>
      <description>Duty-paid goods manufactured by another unit and brought into an assessee&#039;s factory, where they are different from the goods manufactured in that factory, do not by themselves justify confiscation or penalty under the Central Excise Rules. The Tribunal rejected the view that permission requirements applied only where both units belonged to the same manufacturer, and held that the appellant&#039;s request to receive branded goods for removal with its own products was not invalid merely because one supplier was not named. Since the goods were covered by invoice and were admittedly duty-paid, confiscation and penalty were not warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106726</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>