https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331237 Raw materials or in-process goods could not be confiscated under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, because the provision did not extend to such goods, even though the finished packed goods were treated as dutiable manufacture under the relevant notification and tariff entry. The redemption fine and penalty were reduced because the original authority gave no reasons for the quantum and the lapse was limited on the facts. The claim for Cenvat credit was not finally rejected on non-registration alone; entitlement was left open for verification of documents and the applicable legal provisions. en-us Tue, 28 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Aug 2016 11:48:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331237 Raw materials or in-process goods could not be confiscated under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, because the provision did not extend to such goods, even though the finished packed goods were treated as dutiable manufacture under the relevant notification and tariff entry. The redemption fine and penalty were reduced because the original authority gave no reasons for the quantum and the lapse was limited on the facts. The claim for Cenvat credit was not finally rejected on non-registration alone; entitlement was left open for verification of documents and the applicable legal provisions. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 28 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331237