https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216183 Goods made to customer specifications and produced through a manufacturing process were treated as excisable manufactured goods, and marketability was satisfied because the goods were actually sold. The adjudication was not vitiated by the absence of a fresh show cause notice after remand, as the earlier notice and remand proceedings were considered sufficient and no prejudice was shown. The extended limitation period was upheld on the basis of non-filing of declarations, failure to register as an SSI unit, and undisclosed removals. Penalty under Section 11AC was sustained because adjudication occurred after that provision came into force, and the appellant could not contest confiscation of goods lying in the buyer's premises for lack of locus standi. en-us Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Sep 2012 18:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216183 Goods made to customer specifications and produced through a manufacturing process were treated as excisable manufactured goods, and marketability was satisfied because the goods were actually sold. The adjudication was not vitiated by the absence of a fresh show cause notice after remand, as the earlier notice and remand proceedings were considered sufficient and no prejudice was shown. The extended limitation period was upheld on the basis of non-filing of declarations, failure to register as an SSI unit, and undisclosed removals. Penalty under Section 11AC was sustained because adjudication occurred after that provision came into force, and the appellant could not contest confiscation of goods lying in the buyer's premises for lack of locus standi. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216183