https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120282 Seizure of excisable goods lying within a factory by the State Forest Department does not constitute removal under Rule 9(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Where the goods remain within factory premises, are recorded in the RG-I register, and there is neither actual removal nor an attempt to remove them, excise duty is not attracted merely because a State authority seizes the goods. On these facts, a duty demand based solely on seizure is unsustainable. en-us Wed, 27 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:24:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120282 Seizure of excisable goods lying within a factory by the State Forest Department does not constitute removal under Rule 9(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Where the goods remain within factory premises, are recorded in the RG-I register, and there is neither actual removal nor an attempt to remove them, excise duty is not attracted merely because a State authority seizes the goods. On these facts, a duty demand based solely on seizure is unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120282