https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114567 Exempt hank yarn cleared under Rule 96E could not be subjected to central excise duty merely because it was not brought back to the factory, since procedural non-compliance with the movement requirement did not convert exempt goods into dutiable goods. The yarn remained covered by Notification No. 6/2000, and the absence of a specific requirement in Rule 96E to return the processed yarn before clearance meant that duty could not be fastened only on breach of procedure. Penalty was also unsustainable because the removals were undertaken with departmental permission. The duty demand and penalty were therefore set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 May 2012 17:15:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114567 Exempt hank yarn cleared under Rule 96E could not be subjected to central excise duty merely because it was not brought back to the factory, since procedural non-compliance with the movement requirement did not convert exempt goods into dutiable goods. The yarn remained covered by Notification No. 6/2000, and the absence of a specific requirement in Rule 96E to return the processed yarn before clearance meant that duty could not be fastened only on breach of procedure. Penalty was also unsustainable because the removals were undertaken with departmental permission. The duty demand and penalty were therefore set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114567