https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213442 The Tribunal upheld the decision to revoke Central Excise Registration for a premises (Unit III) where no manufacturing activity occurred, emphasizing that mere warehousing of non-excisable goods did not qualify for registration under Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The appellants' argument that quality inspection/testing of imported raw materials justified registration was rejected, with the Tribunal distinguishing relevant case law and affirming the lower authorities' ruling. The appeal was dismissed, and the penalty imposed under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, was upheld. en-us Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Oct 2012 11:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213442 The Tribunal upheld the decision to revoke Central Excise Registration for a premises (Unit III) where no manufacturing activity occurred, emphasizing that mere warehousing of non-excisable goods did not qualify for registration under Rule 9 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The appellants' argument that quality inspection/testing of imported raw materials justified registration was rejected, with the Tribunal distinguishing relevant case law and affirming the lower authorities' ruling. The appeal was dismissed, and the penalty imposed under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213442