https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116886 The Tribunal set aside the confiscation of finished goods and raw material, ruling in favor of the appellants due to insufficient evidence of intent to remove goods without duty payment. The penalty under Rule 25 was also overturned. However, a penalty of Rs. 2000 was imposed under Rule 27 for violating Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The judgment highlighted the necessity of distinguishing between finished goods and raw material regarding excisability, emphasizing the lack of allegations in the show cause notice. The appeal was disposed of in line with these findings and penalties. en-us Mon, 19 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Mar 2024 12:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116886 The Tribunal set aside the confiscation of finished goods and raw material, ruling in favor of the appellants due to insufficient evidence of intent to remove goods without duty payment. The penalty under Rule 25 was also overturned. However, a penalty of Rs. 2000 was imposed under Rule 27 for violating Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The judgment highlighted the necessity of distinguishing between finished goods and raw material regarding excisability, emphasizing the lack of allegations in the show cause notice. The appeal was disposed of in line with these findings and penalties. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 19 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116886