https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118665 Penalties were not warranted where excisable goods were returned by customers for reprocessing and the assessee maintained proper entries and detailed accounts of the returned goods and the processes applied after their return. Under Rule 173L of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, duty refund was contemplated for goods brought back to the factory to be re-made, refined, reconditioned, or subjected to similar processes, subject to maintenance of proper records. In the absence of any allegation that such accounts were not maintained, the legal effect of the reprocessing activity did not justify interference with the order setting aside or reducing the penalties, and the relief to the assessee was upheld. en-us Thu, 21 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Jul 2012 18:26:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118665 Penalties were not warranted where excisable goods were returned by customers for reprocessing and the assessee maintained proper entries and detailed accounts of the returned goods and the processes applied after their return. Under Rule 173L of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, duty refund was contemplated for goods brought back to the factory to be re-made, refined, reconditioned, or subjected to similar processes, subject to maintenance of proper records. In the absence of any allegation that such accounts were not maintained, the legal effect of the reprocessing activity did not justify interference with the order setting aside or reducing the penalties, and the relief to the assessee was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 21 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118665